%<*>} 

S  P  E  E^H 


nj 

yl 


.IFFORD  OF  MAIN* 


U-9 


ON  THE 


GENERAL  APPROPRIATION  BILL  FOR  1840. 


In  the  House  of  Representatives,  April  24,  1840 — In 

Committee  of  the  Whole,  on  the  General  Ap¬ 
propriation  bill. 

Mr.  CLIFFORD  desired  to  make  a  few  remarks 
chiefly  in  reply  to  what  had  been  said  by  others, 
and  consequently  not  immediately  applicable  to  the 
subject  betoie  the  committee.  He  then  spoke  in 
substance  as  follows:  It  would  have  beea  more 
gratifying  to  me,  if  this  debate  had  been  confined 
to  the  usual  range  of  parliamentary  discussion, 
embracing  the  various  propositions  contained  in 
the  bill  under  consideration,  and  excluding  a  great 
variety  of  party  topics  that  have  been  introduced, 
well  calculated  to  protract  the  session,  and  delay 
the  public  business,  without  producing  any  corre¬ 
sponding  benefit.  The  history  of  this  session  aione 
is  amply  sufficient  to  satisfy  every  reflecting  mind, 
that  there  must  be  some  limitation  to  debate  in  a 
deliberative  body,  so  numerous  as  the  House  of  Re¬ 
presentatives,' to  facilitate  the  progress  of  business, 
and  to  preserve  order  and  decorum  among  its 
members;  and  that  the  only  practicable  mode  of 
doing  this,  U  by  a  careful  observance  of  the  rules 
of  the  Houve,  which  should  always  be  enforced, 
when  occasion  requires,  to  promote  these  desirable 
objects.  These  remarks  are  not  made  in  any  spirit 
of  complaint  towards  the  Chair,  for  it  is  not  un¬ 
known  to  me  that  e*very  effort  to  restrain  irregular 
debate  has  been  met  from  certain  quarters  with  a 
determined  resistance  or  a  chilling  support,  and 
the  best  reason  I  have  heard  assigned  for  it,  is 
the  one  given  by  the  gentleman  from  "Virginia, 
Mr.  Wise,  that  “  latitude  in.  debate  is  the  life 
of  the  Opposition;”  and  if  so,  no  one  can  feel 
less  inclined  than  myself,  especially  after 
that  frank  avowal,  to  incur  the  charge  of  at¬ 
tempting  or  desiring  to  destroy  the  vital  princi¬ 
ple  of  a  great  and  powerful  party.  If  latitude 
in  debate  is  desired,  so  let  it  be,  with  this  under¬ 
standing,  that  those  who  seek  to  introduce  it  shall 
have  the  responsibility.  If  the  Democratic  party 
cannot  stand  upon  a  full  discussion,  let  it  fall;  but 


it  cannot  be  expected  that  the  discussion  will  be 
confined  to  one  side.  It  is  not  my  habit  to 
wander  from  the  question,  unless  it  becomes  ne¬ 
cessary  to  do  so  as  a  matter  of  defence.  If  any 
apology  is  necessary  on  the  present  occasion,  it 
wiil  be  found  in  the  remarks  of  the  gentleman 
from  Massachusetts,  [Mr.  Saltsonstall,]  who 
went  into  an  extended  and  ingenious  argument, 
and,  as  I  thought  at  the  time,  in  defence  of  the 
Hartford  Convention  and  of  the  principles  and  mea¬ 
sures  of  the  Federal  party.  Be  that  as  it  may,  he 
now  disclaims  having  done  so.  If  his  expla¬ 
nation  is  not  now  misapprehended,  he  ihen  said,  as  a 
matter  of  expediency,  he  would  not  attempt  their 
defence,  though  he  admits  that  he  participated  in 
the  proceedings  which  laid  the  foundation  for  the 
convention.  Plis  precise  language  is  of  no  im¬ 
portance.  I  cheerfully  accept  the  explanation. 
But,  in  other  respects,  1  cannot  be  mistaken. 
The  gentleman  himself  will  not  deny  that  he 
assured  the  House  and  the  country  that  the 
members  of  that  convention  had  been  censured 
unjustly;  that,  during  an  angry  contest  for  certain 
great  constitutional  principles,  their  designs  had 
been  misunderstood,  and  that  their  motives  had 
been  misrepresented,  and  that  he  repudiated  the 
idea  that  the  Federal  party  ever  contemplated 
the  dissolution  of  the  Union.  He  seems  to  think 
it  unkind  on  the  part  of  his  colleague  to  rake 
j  up  these  old  affairs,  and  says  he  has  scarcely 
■  thought  of  them  lor  the  last  twenty  years,  which, 
to  say  the  least  of  it,  is  a  little  remarkable;  for  if  1 
am  not  greatly  deceived,  he  has  been  intimately 
connected  with  the  Federal  party  in  Massachusetts 
from  1813  to  the  present  time,  advocating  the  same 
principles,  and  maintaining  the  same  political 
associations.  By  the  way  of  remembrance,  in  the 
course  of  my  remarks,  I  will  endeavor  to  refresh 
his  recollection  upon  certain  matters  of  history* 
which,  to  my  mind,  afford  the  most  conclusive 
evidence  that  certain  leaders  of  that  party,  during 
the  last  war  with  Great  Britain,  and  for  several 


years  prior,  covering  the  period  from  1800  to  the 
treaty  of  peace  in  1814,  were  guilty  of  unceasing 
efforts  to  excite  the  people  of  New  England  to  open 
rebellion  and  resistance  of  the  Federal  Govern¬ 
ment,  and  actually  plotted  a  dissolution  of  the  i 
Union  and  the  establishment  of  a  Northern  con¬ 
federacy  under  the  auspices  of  British  protection;; 
and  that  in  ail  this  they  were  actuated  by  that 
inordinate  thirst  for  power  and  inveterate  hatred 
of  free  principles,  which  are  the  essential  elements 
of  Federalism  itself.  But  as  I  propose  to  speak  of 
the  principles  and  measures  of  the  two  great  poli- 
litical  parties  which  have  existed,  in  this  country 
from  the  foundation  of  the  Government  to  the  pre¬ 
sent,  time,  and  which,  from  the  very  nature  of  our 
institutions  and  the  structure  of  the  social  order 
itself,  it  is  reasonable  to  believe,  will  ever  continue 
to  exist,  at  least  till  “the  lion  and  the  lamb  shall  lie 
down  together,”  I  will  touch  upon  those  matters 
in  the  order  of  events  in  which  they  occurred.  The 
first  organization  of  parties  took  place  during  the 
latter  part  of  General  Washington’s  adminis¬ 
tration,  who  had  been  twice  elected  to  the  Chief 
Magistracy  of  the  nation  by  the  spontaneous 
and  unanimous  suffrages  of  the  people,  and,  in 
spite  of  the  radical  and  irreconcileable  differences  of 
opinion,  which  are  known  to  have  existed  among 
the  leading  minds  of  that  eventful,  period,  con¬ 
tinued  to  enjoy,  to  the  very  dose  of  his  last  term, 
the  uninterrupted  confidence  of  ail  classes  of  men. 
In  their  origin,  these  differences  of  opinion  in¬ 
volved  nearly  opposite  views  as  to  the  model  and 
form  of  Government  which  the  exigencies  of  the 
time  demanded,  with  reference  to  its  operation  up¬ 
on  the  frame  and  structure  of  society,  and  its  ten¬ 
dency  to  promote  ihe  individual  happiness  and 
prosperity  of  the  people,  and,  at  the  same  time,  to 
afford  sufficient  strength  and  efficiency  to  insure 
domestic  tranquillity,  and  to  provide  for  the  com¬ 
mon  defence.  The  natural  tendency  of  these  con¬ 
flicting  views,  after  the  adoption  of  the  Constitu¬ 
tion,  led  their  respective  adherents  to  widely  dif¬ 
ferent  rules  of  interpretation  of  the  instrument  it¬ 
self,  in  the  application  of  it  to  the  purposes  for 
which  it  had  been  formed.  This  gave  rise  to  party 
organization,  which,  with  slight  modifications  and 
occasional  interruptions,  has  continued  to  this  dtiy. 
Far  be  it  from  me  to  insinuate  that  there  was  any 
want  of  patriotic  feeling,  or  of  upright  intention,  in 
the  conduct  of  any  member  of  the  convention  that 
framed  ihe  Constitution;  and  candor  will  oblige  me 
to  admit,  that  it  is  by  no  means  certain  that  much 
of  the  distrust  of  the  virtue  and  intelligence  of 
the  people,  which  all  must  admit  was  evinced 
in  that  assembly  by  a  portion  of  its  most  efficient 
members,  may  not  be  traced  to  causes  long  since 
removed  by  the  light  of  experience,  and  yet  while 
they  existed,  affording  at  least  strong  palliation  for 
the  misconceptions  which  they  occasioned.  How¬ 
ever  this  may  be,  it  is  nevertheless  true,  that  the 
master  spirit  and  fathtr  of  Federalism,  Alexander 
Hamilton, was  strongly  inclined  to  the  British  system 
of  Government,  and  indeed  its  open  advocate  for  rea¬ 
sons  entirely  consistent  with  the  purity  of  motive 
which  has  usually  been  ascribed  to  him;  for  it  has 
Swen  said  that  he  verily  believed  it  “to  form  the 
best  model  the  world  ever  produced;”  and  if  so, 
no  one  will  censure  his  motives,  though  I  imagine  [ 


few  among  us  can  be  found,  that  dare  vindicate 
his  principles,  however  similar  their  own  may  be 
in  effect.  He  distrusted  the  capacity  of  the  people 
for  self-government,  and  believed  in  the  necessity 
of  a  strong  Executive  power  to  control  what  he 
called  “the  turbulence  of  Democracy;”  and  it  was 
the  'Executive  feature  of  the  British  system,  above 
all  ethers,  that  excited  his  admiration,  as  being 
above  the  reach  of  improvement.  Observe  his  re¬ 
marks: 

“Seethe  excellence  of  the  British  Executive:  he  is  placed 
above  temptation.  Nothing  short  of  such  an  Executive  (a  King) 
can  be  efficient.  I  confess  the  plan  of  Government  which  l 
propose  is  v'ery  remote  from  the  idea  of  the  people.  Nothing 
but  a  permanent  body  [of  life  legislators]  can  check  the  impru¬ 
dence  of  the  Democracy.  The  people  are  turbulent  and 
changing;  they  seldom  juilec  or  determine  right;  and,  again, 
all  political  communities  ought  to  be  divided  into  the  lew  and 
the  many;  the  first  are  the  rich  and  well  born,  the  other  the 
mass  of  the  people.” 

The  same  want  of  confidence  in  the  sovereign 
voice  of  the  people  to  institute  and  uphold  the  ma¬ 
chinery  of  Government  through  ihe  medium  of 
their  constituted  agents,  is  discoverable  throughout 
his  public  career.  It  is  impossible  to  misunder¬ 
stand  the  scope  and  bearing  of  his  remarks  against 
the  weakness  and  instability  of  Republican  institu¬ 
tions.  Upon  thi«  point, as  upon  all  others, he  descanted 
with  great  freedom  and  boldness.  He  undertook 
to  demonstrate  from  experience  that  their  inevita¬ 
ble  tendency  would  lead  to  anarchy  and  civil  com¬ 
motion,  from  which  he  argued  their  inefficiency  to 
promote  the  durable  happiness  and  prosperity  of  a 
great  and  rising  people. 

“I  despair  that  any  Republican  form  of  Government  can  re¬ 
move  the  difficulties  that  Greece  and  Rome  encountered.  I 
have  well  considered  the  subject,  and  am  well  convinced  that  no 
amendment  of  the  articles  of  confederation  can  answer  the  our- 
noses  of  a  good  Government,  s»  long  dz  th)  State  Governments 
do  in  any  shape  exist.” 

The  more  recent  publication  .  of  his  speech  va¬ 
ries  the  language,  but  does  not  change  the  sense. 
He  is  made  to  say,  that — 

“This  view  of  the  subject  almo  t  led  him  to  despair  that 
a  Republican  Government  could  be  established  over  so 
great  an  extent.  He  was  sensible,  at  the  same  time,  that 
it  would  be  unwise  to  propose  one  of  any  other  form.  In  his 
private  opinion,  he  had  no  scruple  in  declaring,  supported  as  he 
was  by  so  many  of  the  wise  and  the  good,  that  the  British  Go¬ 
vernment  was  the  best  in  the  world,  and  that  he  doubted  whe¬ 
ther  any  thing  short  of  it  would  do  in  America.  The  House  o  f 
Lords  is  a  most  noble  institution.  Having  nothing  to  hope  for 
by  a  change,  and  a  sufficient  interest,  by  means  of  their  pro¬ 
perty,  in  being  faithful  to  the  national  interest,  they  form  a  per  ¬ 
manent  barrier  against  every  pernicious  innovation,  whether  at¬ 
tempted  on  the  part  of  the  Crown  or  of  the  Commons.  No 
temporary  Senate  will  have  firmness  enough  to  answer  the 
purpose.” 

Deriving  his  opinions  from  the  study  of  ihe  mo¬ 
narchies  of  Europe,  and  especially  of  England, 
where  the  voice  of  the  people  had  been  little  consi¬ 
dered,  and,  consequently,  was  greatly  underva¬ 
lued,  he  was  thoroughly  persuaded  that  nothing 
short  of  a  President  and  Senate  for  life,  or  during 
good  behavior,  which,  for  all  practical  purposes,  is 
the  same  thing,  could  ever  obviate  the  defects,  or, 
to  any  extent,  supply  the  deficiencies  which  expe¬ 
rience  had  demonstrated  to  be  inherent  in  the  arti¬ 
cles  of  Confederation.  His  plan  of  Government,- 
as  it  has  been  called,  was  the  third  in  the  order  of 
time  that  was  presented  to  the  convention.  It  was 
on  this  occasion  that  he  expressed  his  opinions  with 
so  much  freedom,  as  well  as  with  masterly  ability*; 
and  throughout  h;s  life  he  evinced  one  characteris¬ 
tic  which  does  not  belong  to  Federalism  of  modem 
date:  he  spurned  disguise,  and  always  evinced  a 


willingness  to  present  to  his  opponents  a  clear  and 
distinct  issue.  He  despised  truckling  and  hypocri¬ 
sy,  and  never  sought  to  change  his  name  or  con¬ 
ceal  his  principles.  He  was  bitterly  opposed  to  the 
State  Governments,  add  he  did  not  hesitate  to 
avow  that  hostility  on  every  suitable  occasion.  In 
speaking  of  the  different  propositions  that  had  pre¬ 
ceded  his  own,  he  remarked ‘  that  the  States,  by 
either,  will  have  the  means  to  counteract  the  Ge¬ 
neral  Government.  They  have  them  State  judges' 
and  militia  all  combined  to  oppose  a  National  Go¬ 
vernment.” 

“Either  plan  is,  therefore,  precarious.  The  Na¬ 
tional  Government  cannot  long  exist,  when  opposed 
hy  such  a  weight}'-  rival.”  While  it  is  no  part  of 
my  intention  to  derogate,  in  the  slightest  degree, 
from  the  merit  of  the  honorable  dead,  I  beg  leave 
to  say,  what  few  will  deny  who  have  any  regard  to 
truth;  that  the  sentiments  so  freely  advanced  by 
Hamilton  are  known  to  have  been  entertained — in 
some  instances,  perhaps,  with  slight  modifications — 
by  very  many  of  the  leaders  of  the  Federal  party, 
at  the  period  of  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution; 
and  that  they  were  openly  acknowledged  b}'-  the 
more  honest  and  candid,  until  their  defeat,  in  1800, 
in  the  election  of  Mr.  Jefferson.  If  there  was  any 
concealment  of  their  disbelief  in  the  stability  of  a 
Republican  form  of  Government,  or  of  their  want 
of  confidence  in  the  capacity  of  the  people  to  go¬ 
vern  themselves,  before  that  time,  it  is  unknown  to 
me.  It  was  not  until  it  was  ascertained  that  the 
views  and  feelings  of  a  great  majority  of  the  peo¬ 
ple  were  averse  to  such  principles,  and  that  those 
who  entertained  them  would  be  excluded  from  any 
participation  in  the  public  councils  of  the  nation, 
that  the  subterfuges  and  disguises  of  the  present 
time  began  to  be  introduced.  Examine  the  speech 
of  Mr.  Morris:  it  is  no  less  explicit,  and  equally 
candid  and  free  of  disguisq.  “The  second  branch 
of  the  Legislature  ought  to  be  composed  of  men 
of  great  and  established  property — an  aristocracy  ! 
men  who,  from  pride,  support  permanency.  To 
make  them  completely  independent,  (of  the  peo¬ 
ple,)  they  mast  be  chosen  for  life.  Such  an  aristo¬ 
cratic  body  would  keep  down  the  turbulence  of 
Democracy.” 

Similar  views  were  taken  by  Mr.  Read,  another 
distinguished  Federalist  in  that  convention.  He 
maintained  that  a  State  Government  is  incompati¬ 
ble  with  a  General  Government,  and  the  elder 
Adams,  though  not  in  the  convention,  was  subse¬ 
quently  supported  by  ihat  party  for  the  Presidency, 
“by  his  being  likely  to  unite  the  votes  of  New 
England,  by  his  favor  with  the  English  party,  from 
his  speculative  views  concerning  the  British  consti¬ 
tution;”  and  the  remark  has  been  frequently  as¬ 
cribed  to  him,  that  it  was  the  true  policy  of  the 
common  people  to  place  the  whole  executive  power 
in  one  man,  though  I  have  not  been  able  to  find 
the  authority  upon  which  the  charge  rents.  The 
plan  of  Mr.  Hamilton,  to  which  I  have  adverted, 
will  be  found  in  ths  Madison  Papers,  recently  pub¬ 
lished,  from  which  I  beg  leave  to  read  a  few  ex¬ 
tracts: 

“The  Senate  to  consist  of  persons  elected  to  serve  during  good 
behavior;  their  election  to  be  made  by  electors,  chosen  lor  that 
purpose  by  the  people.” 

“The  supreme  executive  authority  of  the  United  States  to  be 
fceaied  in  a  governor,  to  be  elected  to  serve  during  good  beha¬ 


vior;  the  election  to  he  made  by  electors,  chosen  by  the  people 
in  the  election  districts.  The  authority  and  functions  of  ihe  ex¬ 
ecutive  to  be  as  follows:  to  have  a  negative  on  all  laws  about  to 
be  passed,  and  the  execution  of  all  laws  passed.” 

But  it  is  useless  to  multiply  extracts  to  prove 
what  is  very  generally  acknowledged, by  those 
who  have  taken  the  trouble  to  investigate,  and 
have  the  honesty  to  admit,  the  truth,  that  very 
many  of  the  old  Federalists  were  openly  in. 
favor  of  a  system  of  Government  not  very  dif¬ 
ferent  from  that  of  the  mother  country,  which, 
to  use  the  language  of  the  elder  Adams, 
they  regarded  as  “the  most  stupendous  fabric  of 
human  wisdom.”  In  treating  of  the  .same  subject, 
the  late  Matthew  Carey  remarks,  “that  the  Federal 
parly  made  every  possible  exertion  to  increase  the 
energy  and  add  to  the  authority  of  the  General 
Government,  and  to  endow  it  with  powers  at  the 
expense  of  the  State  Governments  and  the  people. 
Bearing  strongly  in  mind  the  disorders  and  con¬ 
vulsions  of  some  of  the  ill  balanced  Republics  of 
Greece  and  Italy,  their  sole  object  of  dread  ap¬ 
peared  to  be  the  inroads  of  anarchy;  and  as  man¬ 
kind  too  generally  find  it  difficult  to  steer  the  mid¬ 
dle  course,  their  apprehensions  of  the  Scylla  of 
anarchy  effectually  blinded  them  to  the  Charyb- 
dis  of  despotism.  Had  they  possessed  a  complete 
ascendency  in  the  convention,  it  is  possible  they 
would  have  fallen  into  the  opposite  extreme  to  that 
which  decided  the  tenor  of  the  Constitution.  This 
party  was  divided  among  themselves;  a  small,  but 
very  active,  division  weie  monarchists,  and  utterly 
disbelieved  in  the  efficacy  or  security  of  a  Re¬ 
publican  form  of  Government,  especially  in  a  ter¬ 
ritory  co  extensive  as  that  of  the  United  States* 
embracing  so  numerous  a  population  as  were  to 
be  taken  into  the  account  at  no  distant  period.” 

It  is  a  well-known  fact  that  needs  no  con  firmation, 
that  the  present  Constitution  was  more  the  issult  of 
compromise,  induced  by  the  exigene’es  of  the 
country  at  the  period  of  its  formation,  and  dictated 
by  a  spirit  of  conciliation  and  conscientious  obedi¬ 
ence  to  the  will  of  the  majority,  which  characte¬ 
rized  the  conduct  of  its  framers  at  every  stage 
of  their  proceedings,  than  the  exponent  of  the 
views  of  either  of  the  two  parties  th it  were 
represented  in  that  convention.  The  mass  of 
the  people  felt  deeply  the  imperfections  of 
the  articles  of  confederation,  and  ardently 
wished  for  such  alterations  as  would  lelieve  them 
of  the  evils  which  they  had  experienced  in  conse¬ 
quence  of  them;  but  there  was  a  wide  diversity  of 
opinion  as  to  the  character  of  the  alterations  ne¬ 
cessary  to  be  made  to  attain  that  object.  On  the 
17th  of  September,  1787,  the  present,  draft  was 
agreed  to,  and  immediately  transmuted  to  Congress 
“in  a  letter  subscribed  by  the  President,  in  which 
it  was  said  to  be  the  result  of  a  spirit  of  amity  and 
of  that  mutual  deference  and  concession  which  the 
peculiarity  of  their ' political  situation  rendered  in¬ 
dispensable.”  Immediately  after  i  s  publication  it 
was  submitted  by  Congress  to  the  several  States  for 
ratification.  It  is  necessary  to  glance  at  the  dix* 
cussion  that  ensued,  in  order  more  fully  to  compre** 
hend  the  aim  and  objects  of  parties,  or  the  motive 
by  which  they  were  influenced  at  the  time  of  its 
adoption.  It  is  true  that  many  of  the  Republicans 
opposed  it,  not  because  they  were  aveise  to 
,  a  mere  perfect  union  of  the  States  for 


3^  4.VV 


certain  specified  purposes,  to  regulate  the 
commerce  of  ihe  country,  and  to  insure  the  com¬ 
mon  defence,  but  because,  in  some  respects,  its  in¬ 
ternal  powers  were  more  ample,  and  in  others,  less 
cautiously  restricted,  as  they  believed,  than  were 
consistent  with  the  sovereignty  of  the  States,  or  ihe 
liberty  of  the  people.  They  were  jealous  of  the 
extent  of  p  :  we:  conferred  upon  the  Executive,  as 
conceding  too  much  to  the  known  partialities  of 
their  opponents,  and  they  eriticized,  with  great  se¬ 
verity,  the  omission  to  provide  a  bill  of  rights  for 
the  security  of  the  citizen.  It  was  this  last  objec¬ 
tion  that  weighed  so  heavily  on  the  mind  of  Mr. 
Jefferson,  and  it  is  no  discredit  to  the  soundness  of 
his  judgment,  that  the  good  sense  of  the  people  so 
far  appreciated  his  opinions,  as  to  supply  the  defi¬ 
ciency.  On  this  point  Mr.  Jefferson  remarks: 

“I  approved  as  much  of  the  Constitution  as  most  persons, 
and  more  of  it  was  disapproved  by  my  accuser  than  by  me, 
and  of  its  parts  most  vitally  Republican.  My  objection  to  the 
Constitution  was  the  want  of  a  bill  of  rights— Colonel  Hamil¬ 
ton’s,  that  it  wanted  a  king  and  a  house  of  lords.  The  sense  of 
America  has  approved  my  objection,  and  added  the  bill  of 
rights,  and  not  the  king  and  lords.’’ 

Again,  he  denies  that  he  was  opposed  to  the  pay¬ 
ment  of  the  public  debt,  and  says: 

“He  wishes  it  paid  to-morrow — Colonel  Hamilton  never;  but 
always  to  remain  in  existence,  for  him  to  manage  and  corrupt 
the  Legislature.” 

It  is  undeniably  true,  that  some  of  ihe  features 
of  the  instrument,  which  most  excited  the  fears 
and  jealousy  of  those  that  desired  as  far  as  possi¬ 
ble  to  preserve  the  authority  of  the  States,  afforded 
the  strongest  inducements  to  their  opponents 
to  espouse  iis  adoption,  which  they  did,  for  the  rea¬ 
sons  assigned,  as  well  as  from  the  conviction  aris¬ 
ing  from  the  fact,  then  made  evident  in  the  discus¬ 
sion  that  immediately  followed  its  publication,  that 
no  nearer  approach  to  that  system  of  national  pow¬ 
er  to  which  ail  their  efforts  had  been  directed  with 
earnest  solicitude,  could  ever  receive  the  sanction 
of  the  mass  of  the  people.  The  development  of 
public  sentiment  on  this  point  was  so  clear,  that 
the  most  barefaced  advocates  of  monarchy  yielded 
to  the  (-iemonstrations  of  the  voice  of  the  people, 
and  advocated  the  adoption  of  the  Constitu¬ 
tion;  and  whatever  may  be  thought  of  their  mo¬ 
tives,  it  must  be  confessed  they  contributed  to  a 
praiseworthy  result.  It  cannot  be  necessary  or 
useful  to  pursue  that  branch  of  the  inquiry  further. 
My  object  is  accomplished  if  I  have  said  enough 
to  draw  attention  to  the  incipient  causes  which  led 
to  party  division  at  the  period  of  which  lam  speak¬ 
ing;  and,  if  I  am  not  mistaken,  all  who  have  ex¬ 
amined  the  subject  with  the  care  which  it  deserves, 
will  feel  obliged  to  acknowledge  that  it  took  its  rise 
in  a  radical  and  theoretical  difference  of  opinion 
as  to  the  first  principle  of  Government  itself,  with 
reference  to  its  tendency  to  promote  the  happiness 
and  prosperity  of  those  for  whose  benefit  it  is  insti¬ 
tuted.  Let  that  be  as  it  may,  of  this  I  am  certain, 
that  ever  since  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  it 
lias  been  the  policy  of  the  Federal  party  to  obtain 
)by  construction,  in  every  shape  and  form  which  hu¬ 
man  ingenuiiy  can  suggest,  what  they  failed  to  se¬ 
cure  after  repeated  attempts,  by  express  grant. 

The  vagrant  power  to  incorporate,  which  has  so 
many  advocates  at  this  lime  in  the  ranks  of  the 
Opposition,  though  scarcely  any  two  of  them  can 
agree  upon  its  locality,  was  directly  and  solemnly 


refused  a  place  in  the  Constitution.  It  was  several 
limes  considered,  in  one  fotm  or  another;  but,  as 
often  as  it  was  proposed,  it  was  promptly  voted 
down  by  a  large  majority  of  the  Stales.  The  rea¬ 
sons  assigned  for  the  refusal  were,  that  the  people 
in  certain  portions  of  the  Confederacy  were  averse 
to  a  National  Bank,  and  if  the  power  to  incorpo¬ 
rate  should  be  recommended,  it  would  obviously 
include  the  right  to  charter  a  Bank,  and  that  this 
would  present  an  obstacle  of  a  very  dangerous 
character  to  the  consummation  of  the  general  de¬ 
sign.  Thus  it  appeals,  at  that  early  day,  the  pec- 
pie  of  this  country  were  fully  apprised  of  the 
dangerous  influences  and  alarming  tendency  of  a 
corporate  institution  in  the  bosom  of  a  free  Repub¬ 
lic,  to  control  its  currency,  and  to  mete  out  its  fa¬ 
vors  or  its  curses  as  self-interest  might  render  most 
expedient  to  its  purpose.  The  people  never  dream¬ 
ed.  during  the  discussion  that  ensued,  that  any  such 
power  would  be  found  lurking  in  the  provisions  of 
the  instrument  they  were  called  upon  to  sanction 
by  their  suffrages.  But  no  sooner  was  it  adopted 
than  the  Federal  party,  true  to  their  original  de¬ 
sign,  claimed  it  by  construction.  The  Democratic 
party  denied  it,  and  they  deDy  it  still.  The  oppo¬ 
nents  of  this  Administration,  by  whatever  name 
they  choose  to  call  themselves,  affirm  it.  This  was 
the  great  point  of  division  when  party  organiza¬ 
tion,  in  its  more  extended  sense,  took  place  at  the 
close  of  Gen.  Washington’s  administration  with 
reference  to  the  selection  of  his  successor. 

The  objects  of  parties  underwent  no  change,  but 
the  system  of  operation  was  necessarily  varied 
to  the  altered  circumstances  with  which  they  were 
surrounded;  all  acquiesced  in  the  new  Constitution, 
but  their  principles  remained  the  same  as  before 
its  adoption.  It  now  became  necessary  to  fix  its 
interpretation.  Here  they  divided.  The  one 
party  desired  to  confine  its  application  to  the  spe¬ 
cified  objects  for  which  it  had  been  created;  the 
other  was  equally  solicitous  to  extend  its  provisions 
by  implication,  to  embrace  the  objects  which  they  be¬ 
lieved  ought  to  have  been  included  among  its  enume¬ 
rated  powers.  The  ostensible  object  of  the  latter,  so  far 
as  any  avowal  of  their  intention  was  made,  was  to 
include  the  power  to  incorporate,  with  the  view. to 
the  establishment  of  a  National  Bank.  This  has 
been  a  favorite  object  with  the  anti-Democratic 
party  at  every  stage  of  our  history,  and  through  all 
the  disguises  of  names  and  principles  which  have 
marked  its  career  of  wickedness  and  folly;  and  if  I 
am  not  greatly  deceived  in  the  signs  of  the  times,  it 
is  one  of  the  leading  motives  to  the  desperate  strag¬ 
gle  for  power  and  place  now  being  made  by  a 
great  and  powerful  party,  under  the  assumed  name 
of  Whigs.  Oil  the  14th  of  December,  1790,  the 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury  transmitted  to  Congress 
a  letter,  accompanying  his  report  of  a  plan  of  a 
National  Bank.  The  report  is  full  and  elabo¬ 
rate,  but  I  will  not  weary  attention  by  reading 
more  than  a  single  passage:  “It  is  to  be 
considered  that  such  a  bank  is  not  a  mere  matter  of 
private  property,  but  a  political  machine  of  the 
greatest  importance  to  the  State.”  It  is  manifest 
that  the  author  of  that  paper  looked  upon  a  bank 
as  the  natural  ally  of  the  Execntive,  and  as  a  va¬ 
luable  and  necessary  appendage  of  national  power, 
calculated  to  give  strength  and  vigor  to  the  Federal 


Administration,  in  ail  its  interna!  operations  and 
machinery.  Undoubtedly  it  might  be  so,  while  its 
favor  was  conciliated,  and  the  wishes  of  its  owners 
and  managers  consulted.  The  principle  of  self 
interest  would  dictate  so  much  of  patriotism,  and 
no  more.  The  reason,  however,  that  prompted  its 
recommendation,  was  founded  upon  the  expecta¬ 
tion  of  its  alliance  with  the  Government.  But  ex¬ 
perience  has  shown,  beyond  controversy,  that, 
while  such  an  ins'atution  'may  become  a  political 
machine,  to  sustain  an  administration  of  its  choice, 
at  is  no  less  powerful  in-opposition  to  one  that  may 
incur  its  displeasure.  That,  in  either  event,  it  will 
be  a  political  machine  in  the  hands  of  its  directors, 
and  consequently  i responsible  to  the  people  of  the 
■■country,  needs  no  confirmation.  But  to  mark  the 
I  ne  of  party  division  with  more  accuracy,  it  is  ne¬ 
cessary  to  pursue  this  subject  further. 

It  soon  became  evident  that  the  people,  as  well 
sls  the  cabinet,  were  divided  in  opinion  touching  the 
constitutional  power  of  Congress  to  charter  such 
an  institution.  The  President,  in  pursuance 
of  a  practice  which  then  prevailed,  required 
the  members  or'  his  cabinet  to  submit 
their  respective  views  in  writing.  As  the 
opinions  of  Hamilton  and  Jefferson  cover 
the  whole  ground,  I  will  read  from.  them. 
It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  the  former  main¬ 
tained  the  power  to  incorporate,  in  its  broadest 
sense,  without  limitation,  deriving  it  from  every 
.specified  grant  in  the  Constitution.  Fearlessness 
was  a  prominent  trait  of  his  character,  and,  as  I 
have  already  remarked,  he  spurned  any  disguise, 
and  on  this  occasion  broached  the  whoie  doctrine 
of  construction,  untinctiued  with  lire  concealment 
of  after  times;  and  throughout  his  whole  public 
life,  I  believe,  he  adhered  to  it,  and  gave  it  a  steady 
and  firm  support.  It  vt-ill  appear  that  he  claimef 
the  right  as  an  attribute  of  sovereignty  itself,,  and 
after  premising  that  it  is  the  clause  of  incorpora- 
ton  which  gives  rise  to  objection,  he  re 
marks: 

“Now  it  appears  to  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  that  this 
general  principle  is  inherent  in  the  very  definition  of  Go¬ 
vernment,  and  essential  to  every  step  of  the  progress  to  be  made 
by-  that  of  the  United  States;  namely,  that  every  power  vested 
in  a  Government  is  in  its  nature  sovereign,  and  includes,  by 
force  of  the  teem,  a  right  to  employ  all  the  means  requisite,  and 
fairly  applicable  to  the  attainment  of  the  ends  of  such  power, 
and  which  are  not  precluded  by  restrictions  and  exceptions  spe¬ 
cified  in  the  Constitution,  or  not  immoral,  or  not  contrary  to 
t  he  essential  ends  of  political  society.  The  circumstances  that  | 
the  powers  of  sovereignty  are,  in  this  country,  divided  be' ween 
the  National  and  State  Government,  does  not'  afford  the  distinc¬ 
tion  required.” 

“The  power  which  can  create  the  supreme  law  of  the  lahd  in 
any  case,  is  doubtless  sovereign  as  to  such  case..  This  general 
and  indisputable  principle  puts  St  once  an  end  to  th  e-abstract 
question  whether  the  U. States  have  power  to-erect  a  corporation, 
that  is  tosay,  to  give  a  legal  and  artificial  capacity  to  one  or 
more  person*,  distinct  from  the  natural;  for  it  is  unquestionably 
incident  to  sovereign  power  to  erect  corporations,  and,1  conse¬ 
quently,  to' that  of  the  United  States  in  relation  to  the  objects 
entrusted  to  the  management  of  the  Government.” 

No  one  can  fail  lo  pjrceive  that  the  opinion  of 
Mr.  Jefferson  is  equally  explicit,  and  precisely  ihe 
reverse,  denying,  in  every  respect,  i he  premises  and 
conj&luMot  s  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury.  He 
says:  “I  consider  the  foundation  of  the  €om tilu- 
lion  as  laid  on  this  ground,  that  all  powers  rot  de¬ 
legated  to  the  United  States  by  the  Constitution’, 
nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the  States,  are  reserved  to 
the  States  or  the  people.  To  take  a  single  step  be¬ 
yond  the  boundaries  thus  specially  drawn  around 


the  powers  of  Congress  is  to  take  possers’cn  of  a 
boundless  field  of  power  no  longer  susceptible  of 
any  definition.  The  incorporation  of  a  bank  and 
other  powers  assumed  by  this  bill,  have  nor,  in  my 
opinion,  been  delegated  to  the  United  Sia  es  by  the 
Constitution. 

“I.  They  are  not  among  the  powers  specially 
enumerated. 

“II.  Nor  are  they  within  either  of  the  general 
hrases,  which  are  ihe  two  following: 

“1.  To  lay  taxes  to  provide  for  the  general  wel¬ 
fare  of  the  United  Slates;  that  is  to  say,  to  lay 
taxes  for  the  purpose  of  providing  for  the  general 
welfare;  for  i  he  laying  of  taxes  isr,the  power,  and  the 
general  welfare  the  purpose  for  which  the  power  is 
to.  be  exercised.  They  are  not  to  lay  taxes  ad  libi¬ 
tum  for  any  purpose  they  please,  but  only  to  pay 
the  debts  or  provide  for  the  welfare  of  the  Union. 

“2.  The  second  general  phrase  is  to  make  all  laws 
necessary  and  proper  for  carrying  into  execution 
the  enumerated  powers.  But  they  can  all  be  car¬ 
ried  into  execution  without  a  bank.  A  bank  there¬ 
fore  is  not  necessary,  and  conseqtff.tPly  hot  autho¬ 
rized  by  this  phrase.” 

To  avoid  being  tedious,  I  must  pass  rapidly 
over  the  period  that  immediately  followed  the  .esta¬ 
blishment  of  a  National  Bank.  Suffice  it  to  say, 
rn  the  language  of  the  historian  of  Washington, 
that  “this  measure  male,  a  deep  impression  on 
many  members  of  the  Legislature,  and  contributed 
not  inconsiderably  to  the  complete  organization  of 
those  disinct  and  visible  parlies  which,  in  their 
long  and  dubious  conflict  for  power,  have  since 
shaken  the  United  States  ta  their  centre.”  It  has 
seemed  to  me  proper  to  draw  public  attention  lo 
the  source  of  party  division;  as,  in  tne  course  of 
this  debate,  both  sides  have  claimed  to  be  Republi¬ 
can',  and  all  seem  anxious  to  cast  off  the  name  of 
Federalist;  and  as  names  are  subject  to  change  at 
all  times,  'be  surest  test  is  to  look  at  the  principles. 
The'  struggle  lhat  ensued, \it  must  be  admitted  oil 
all  sides,  was  one  for  principle.  [The  Bank,  or 
Federal  party,  supported  the  elder  Adams  for  rea¬ 
sons  which  I  have  before  stated;  the  Democratic 
party  supported  Mr.  Jefferson.  The .  former  suc¬ 
ceeded  by  a  majority  of  three  votes.  That  Ad¬ 
ministration  has  been  emphatically  denominated 
“the  reign  of  terror.”  The  alien  and  sedition  laws 
were  among  the  tyrannical  measures  which  served 
to  awaken  the  people  to  a  sense  of  the  danger 
with  which  they  were  surrounded.  Tne  liberty  of 
speech  and  the  press  was  invaded,  under  the  pre¬ 
tence  of  affording  proteciion  to  public  officers 
against  the  strictures  of  party,  and  the  prevalent 
disposition  fo  slander  and  decry  the  Government; 
lights  heretofore  held  sacred  were  forgotten,  like 
the  dreams  of  the  nieht,  in  the  shameless  prosecu¬ 
tions  for  alleged  violations  of  this  “gag  law,”  and 
the  most  open  and  barefaced  infractions  of  the  so¬ 
cial  compact  were  perpe' rated  with  impunity,  until 
“ail  confidence  was  lost  in  the  midst  of  fear  and 
apprehension.”  Perhaps  it  is  not  going  too  far  to 
say  that  these  several  measures  were  partly  in¬ 
duced  bv,  if  hot  the  necessary  consequence  of,  the 
sympathies  and  attachments  of  the  party  that  sus¬ 
tained  them  to  a  system  of  national  power,  in  con¬ 
formity  with  the  Constitution  and  la  vs  of  Great 
Britain,  which  they  had  long  desired  to  see  esta- 


blished  in  this  country,  and  which,  excited  so  much 
of  their  admiration.  The  sedition  law  was  carried 
into  effect,  and  enforced  in  some  instances  with 
great  severity. 

The  case  of  Matthew  Lyon  was  one  of  pe¬ 
culiar  aggravation,  and,  as  a  sample  of  the 
bitter  persecutions  under  that  odious  law,  deserves 
to  be  more  fully  considered.  From  his  account  of 
the  transaction,  which  is  believed  to  be  correct,  he 
was  indicted,  among  other  things  equally  harmless, 
for  publishing  that,  “  as  to  the  Executive,  when  I 
shall  see  the  efforts  of  that  power  bent  on  the  pro¬ 
motion  of  the  comfort  and  happiness,  and  the  ac¬ 
commodation  of  the  people,  thai  Executive  shall 
have  my  zealous  and  uniform  support;  but  when¬ 
ever  I  shall,  on  the  part  of  the  Executive,  see 
every  consideration  of  the  public  welfare  swallowed 
up  in  a  continued  grasp  for  power,  and  an  un¬ 
bounded  thirst  for  ridiculous  pomp,  foolish  adula¬ 
tion,  and  selfish  avarice,  &c.  I  shall  not  be  their 
humble  advocate.”  Upon  this  accusation,  and  others 
of  no  greater  impoit  in  my  estimation,  a  pliant, 
packed,  political  jury,  selected  for  the  purpose, 
under  the  direction  of  a  party  judge,  inheriting  the 
spirit  of  a  Jeffries-,  and  influenced  with  anglo-aris- 
tocratic  zeal,  brought  in  a  verdict  of  “guilty.”  The 
author  goes  on  to  say,  that  in  consequence  of  this 
unjustifiable  verdict,  and  tha  subsequent  creel 
judgment,  he  was  contumaciously  dragged  oat  of 
his  own  county,  where  a  decent  jail  was  at  the 
disposal  of  the  National  Government,  and  in  an 
ignominious  manner  carried  fifty  miles,  and  in  a 
bad  state  of  health,  thrown  in'o  a  dismal  dungeon, 
the  common  receptacle  of  robbers,  thieves,  and 
murderers;  and  when  three  thousand  citizens  peti¬ 
tioned  for  his  release,  they  were  told  by  the  Presi¬ 
dent,  that  submission  mutt  precede  pardon. 

In  1800  the  success  of  the  Democratic  party  was 
complete.  The  voice  of  the  people  triumphed  over 
the  slanders  and  falsehoods  which  bad  been 
heaped  upon  the  candidate  of  their  choice. 
Thomas  Jefferson  was  elected  President.  I  will 
pass  over  the  characteristic  intrigue  of  the  Fede¬ 
ral  party  after  their  defeat  in  the  attempt  to  elevate 
to  that  station  an  individual  they  had  uniformity 
despised,  and  who  had  not  received;  one  vole  of  the 
people  with  the  view  to  any  such  elevation,  for 
the  sole  purpose  of  trampling  under  foot  the 
solemnly  expressed  voice  of  the  nation.  It  has 
become  proverbial  that  traitors  from  the  Demo¬ 
cratic  rankspnd  favor  with  our  opponents,  of  which 
we  have  some  high  examples  in  modern  times. 

This  glorious  event  was  hailed  with  great  joy  by 
the  friends  of  equal  rights,  in  all  parts  of  the  coun¬ 
try,  as  the  harbinger  of  better  days;  and  no  one 
ever  had  occasion  to  say  that  his  most  sanguine 
expectations  weenot  fully  realized  in  the  radical 
change  of  policy  (hat  ensued.  The  schemes  for, 
■undermining,  the  Constitution  were  defeated,  and 
the  Government  restored  to  its  primitive  purity. 
But  if  it  were  desirable,  it  is  not  within  the  scope 
of  my  present  design  to  speak  very  minutely  of  the 
great  and  salutary  reform  that  immediately  follow¬ 
ed  in  the  administration  of  public  affairs.  No  Ad¬ 
ministration  ever  commenced  under  more  favora¬ 
ble  auspices,  and  none  ever  more  fully  lived  up  to 
the  professions  on  which  it  was  created,  or  contri¬ 
buted  more  largely  to  lay  the  lasting  foundations  of 


Republican  freedom:  it  was  praissd  at  the  time  by 
its  friends,  and  it  has  since  been  eulogized  by  its  ene¬ 
mies;  and  now,  after  the  lapse  of  forty  years,  it  is 
matter  of  grave  dispute  among  us  who  shall  be 
considered  its  followers.  On  this  last  point  I  shall 
have  something  to  remark  before  f  sit  down — at 
present  I  wish  to  deal  further  with  its  opponents. 
The  next  fourteen  years,  embracing  Ihe  period  of 
the  embargo,  non-intei course,  and  the  laic  war  with 
Great  Britain,  is  one  of  great  interest  and  lull  of 
instruction  as  lo  the  motives  and  designs  of  the  Fe¬ 
deral  party;  their  whole  course,  without  interrup¬ 
tion,  was  marked  by  a  reckless  opposition  to  the 
Government  of  the  people,  and  seems  to 
have  been  dictated  by  two  leading  mo¬ 
tives — thirst  for  power  and  implacable  ha 
tred  of  incumbents  »n  office;  and  their  principa 
weapons  of  attack  were  falsehood,  deception,  am 
calumny.  All  their  efforts  were  directed  to  on^ 
object,  which  is  sufficiently  disclosed  in  theit 
motto,  which  was  very  generally  adopted,  that 
“the  Administration  must  came  down.”  It  wa* 
no  less  truest  that  time  than  it  is  now,  that  about 
two-thirds  of  the  political  journals  published  in 
New  England  were  opposed  to  the  Administration, 
as  weil  as  the  great  proportion  of  wealth  It  has 
bgen  said,  and  I  doubt  not  with  truth,  that  for 
years  not  a  single  number  of  the  Boston  Centmel, 
"Repertory,  &c.  were  published  free  from  attacks  of 
the  most  vilifying  character  on  the  Administrat  on 
— every  act  of  the  President  was  misrepresemed, 
and  she  most  unholy  and  pernicious  means  were 
constantly  employed  to  excite  the  prejudices  of  the 
people,  against  every  public  functionary,  however 
elevated  or  humble.  A  large  proportion  of  the  weal¬ 
thiest  men  m  ths  community  were  combined  in  a 
ffagitous  effort  to  tear  down  the  pillars  of  the  Go¬ 
vernment,  which  had  been  erected  at  so  great  a 
sacrifice  in  the  Revolutionary  struggle  for  indepen¬ 
dence,  not  only  by  throwing  every  obstacle  and 
ernbana-sment  in  their  power  in  the  way  of  its 
administration,  but,  as  the  sequel  will  show,  by 
obstructing  and  harassing  all  its  endeavors 
to  protect  and  defend  the  national  honor,  ana 
finally  Coalescing  with  its  ancient  and  invi - 
rate  toe.  Now,  if  this  was  patriotism,  then  these 
men  were  patriotic,  and  not  otherwise. 

This  is  not  mere  supposition — it  is  historical  fact, 
and  susceptible  of , the  clearest  demonstration;  and 
[  will  freely  acknowledge  that  it  is  not  so  much  my 
object  at  this  time  to  detain  the  committee  wrh  any 
remarks  of -my.  own,  as  to  exhibit  to  the  country 
anew  the  proofs  of  some  of  these  allegations.  This 
has  become  necessary,  in  consequence  of  the  de¬ 
nial  which  has  been  made  Let  us  see' whether 
this  party,  has  been  misrepresented,  and  examine 
into  their  boasted  patriotism.  If  I  mistake  no?,  it 
will  be  found  to  have  consisted  for  a  series  of  ycats 
in  sympathy  for  the  interests  and  designs  of  a  fo¬ 
reign  power,  in  opposition  to  the  interests  and 
honor  of  their  own  country.  The  conduct  of  Eng¬ 
land  towards  the  United  States  had  been  one  unin¬ 
terrupted  course  of  argresfou  and  violation  of  na¬ 
tional  faith.  Jealousy  and  ill  wi  1  were  the  predo¬ 
minant  features  of  her  policy.  She  had  on  many 
occasions,  and  in  the  grossest  manner,  violated  the 
treaty  of  peace.  She  had  declined  a  treaty  of  com¬ 
merce — she  had  impressed  our  seamen — she  had 


«*  v.t 


instigated  the  savage  tribes  to  tomahawk  and  scalp 
American  citizens — she  had  stimulated  the  merce¬ 
nary  and  piratical  of  all  nations  to  prey  upon  our 
unprotected  commerce — and,  in  a  word,  “she  had 


that  subsequently  opposed  every  effort  of  the  Go¬ 
vernment  in  themo.-t  treasonable  manner,  to  rescue 
our  national  interests  from  the  ruin  which  must 
have  ensued  if  no  counteracting  remedies  had 


insulted  our  flag,  and  pillaged  our  trade  in  every  been  adopted.  Before  this,  Mr.  Jefferson  hadbeen 
quarter  of  the  world.”  Of  the  many  violations  of  opposed  with  the  usual  billingsgate  of  party  war- 


the  laws  of  nations  perpetrated  by  Great  Britain,  1 
■will  only  glance  at  some  of  the  most  glaring,  and 
those  in  an  especial  manner  which  had  the  most  in¬ 
fluence  upon  political  parties  at  home,  among 


tare;  he  had  been  denounced  as  a  Jacobin,  as  an 
enemy  to  social  order  and  religion;  he  had  been  ac¬ 
cused  of  immorality  and  infidelity,  and  all  the  u>iial 
accusations  of  that  party;  he  was  now  charged  with 


which  were  the  impressment  of  our  seamen,  under!  weakness  and  imbecility,  and  even  cowardice;  and 


the  pretence  of  right  to  search  American  vessels 
for  deserters  from  the  British  navy,  and  the  orders 
an  council  of  the  lGth  of  May,  1806,  and  the  11th  of 
November,  1807. 

The  right  of  search  had  been  claimed  and  wan¬ 
tonly  exercised  for  many  years,  and  had  been  re-, 
'peatedly  made  the  subject  of  remonstrance  a-  far 
back  as  1792.  Both  parties  had  complained  of  its 
injustice  and  of  the  iniquity  ,  of  the  practice,  and 
had  uniformly  regarded  it  as  a  violation  of  the 
laws  of  nations.  It  is  difficult  to-esiimale  the  ex¬ 
tent  to  which  this  outrage  upon  the  rights  and  li¬ 
berties  of  American  seamen  was  -  carried.  It  has 


every  measure  was  resorted  to,  to  goad  his  admi¬ 
nistration  into  resistance  of  the  high-handed  and 
oppressive  pretensions  and  outrages  of  the  parent 
country.  Negotiation  had  failed.  Three  expedi¬ 
ents  only  were  left  to  be  tried — embargo,  non-inter¬ 
course,  and  war.  The  merchants  preferred  the  for¬ 
mer,  or,  at  all  events3,  were  willing  to  leave  the 
whole  subject  to  th?  constituted  authorities.  To  this 
effect  they  certainly  expressed  themselves  in  their 
various  petitions  for  redress. 

It  is  .sufficient  to  know  that  they  demanded  re¬ 
dress,  and  admit,  if  you  please — for  I  beiieve  it  is 
true — they  professed  to  be  willing  to  leave  to  the 
been  estimated  that,  at  the  date  of  the  declaration  j  decision  x>f  Congress  the  remedy  to  be  prescribed, 
of  war,  on  the  18th  of  June,  1812,  not  less  than  j  Public  meetings  were  held  in  all  the  principal  cities, 
fourteen  thousand  persons  had  been  seized  upon  the  j  and  memorials  to  Congress  adopted,  setting  forth, 
high  seas  and  dragged  from  their  lawful  employ-  j  the.r  grievances  in  glowing  colors,  and  pledging 
merit  and  homes.  The  British  officer  on  board  be-  their  aid  and  support  in  the  most  solemn  manner,  to 
came  at  once  the  captor,  accuser,  witness,  and  any  measure  of  relief  which  the  wisdom  of  that 
judge,  and  yet  one  of  the  patriotic  eommiitses  of  body  might  judge  expedient.  The  Federal  mer- 
the  Massachusetts  Legislature;  for  the  double  pur-  chants  of  Bostorr  were  among  the  first  to  memo- 


pose  of  excusing  Great  Britain  and  casting  re¬ 
proach  upon  the  Administration,  reported,  that  there 
were  but  eleven  Massachusetts  sailors  on  board 
the  vessels  of  his  Britannic  Majesty  in  June,  1812. 

The  object  of  the  orders  in  council,  of  the  16b 
of  May,  1806,  wr.s  to  blockade  the  coast  of  Ger¬ 
many,  Holland,  and  France,  from  Elbe  to  Brest, 
a  distance  of  eight  hundred  miles.  *t  was  a  mere 
paper  blockade,  in  direct  violation  of  the  laws  of 
nations,  and  a  highhanded  outrage  of  the 
neutral  rights  of  the  United  States.  The 
order  in  council,  of  the  11th  of  Novem¬ 
ber,  1807,  was  issued  professedly  as  a  re¬ 
taliation  for  the  Berlin  decree  of  France, 
whereby  all  neu'ral  vessels,  bound  to  France  or 
her  dependencies,  or  to  any  port  from  which  Bri¬ 
tish  vessels  were  excluded,  and  all  vessels  furnish¬ 
ed  with  French  consular  certificates,  were  declared 
liable  to  se  zure  and  condemnation;  but  their  real 
design  was  to  compel  the  United  States  to  declare 
war  against  our  friend  and  ally  in  the  Revolution¬ 
ary  struggle  for  independence;  and  in  this  design 
the  Federal  party  concurred.  These  measures 
were  destructive  to  the  rights  and  interests  of  the 
United  States,  and  especially  to  the  commercial 
class,  who  were  in  a  great  measure  driven  from  the 
ocean,  and  a  lucrative  trade,  for  no  other  purpose 
than  to  administer  to  the  cupidity  and  malice  of 
the  “mistress  of  the  sea;”  and  yet,  strange  as  it 
may  seem,  many  concurred  in  the  general  design, 
while  at  the  same  time  they  called  loudly  upon 
their  own  Government  to  relieve  them  from  the 
embarrassments  which  it  produced.  Parties  were 
divided  as  to  lhe  causes  of  their  distress;  but  all 
demanded  redress,  and  condemned  the  aggressions, 
and  none  were  more  clamorous  than  the  very  men 


lialize  Congress,  and  demand  redress.  I  ask  leave 
to  read  a  few  passages  from  that  paper. 

“Unless  the  present  disposition  of  the  llritish  admiralty 
courts'  and  navy  officers  can  he  counteracted  and  removed,  a 
widely  dispersed  and  unprotected  commerce,  extending  to  every 
region  of  the  globe,  will  only  serve  to  invite  depredation,  to 
bankrupt  ourselves  and  en#ich  others,  until  such  commerce  be 
swept  from  the  face  of  the  ocean.'’ 

Thet  furiher  state,  “That  a  tacit  ?ubmisMon  to 
pretensions  -thus  lofty,  would  be  an  abandonment 
of  rights  openly  recognised,  and  aderelictirn  of 
the  most  important  commercial  interests  of  this 
country.”  And  ihey  add:  “Reason,  and  the  most 
powerful  considerations  of  equity,  enjoin  it  as  a 
duty  on  the  United  States,  to  oppose  these  preten¬ 
sions.”  And  t1'5 at  “These  pretensions  are  unsound 
in  point  of  principle,  offensive  in  practice,  and  nu¬ 
gatory  in  effect.”  They  charge  the  British  Govern¬ 
ment  with  “preying  upon  the  unprotected  pro¬ 
perty  of  a  friendly  power;”  and  call  upon  the  Ad¬ 
ministration  “promptly  to  adopt,  such  measures 
as  might  disembarrass  our  commerce,  assert  our 
rights,  and  support  the  dignity  of  the  United 
States.” 

The  Newburyport  memorial  alleges  that — 

“  In  many  cases  our  vesselsand  cargoes  have  been  captured, 
tried,  and  Condemned,  under  unusual  and  alarming  pretenses, 
which,  if  permitted  to  continue,  threaten  the  ruin  of  our  com¬ 
mercial  interests.  So  far  from  obtaining  redress  of  our  griev¬ 
ances  by  the  ordinary  modes  and  processes  of  law,  vve  have  irx 
most  cases  been  subj  -ct  to  heavy  costs,  and  suffered  embrrass- 
ing  and  distressing  detention  of  property,  even  when  no  pre¬ 
tence  could  be  found  to  authorize  the  seizure  of  it.  Having 
sustained  these  losses  and  injuries  in  the  prosecution  of  our  law¬ 
ful  commerce,  and  in  the  exercise  of  our  just  rights,  we  rely 
with  confidence  on  the  wisdom,  firmness,  and  justice  ofour  Go¬ 
vernment,  to  obtain  for  us'that  protection  which  a  regard  to  the 
honor  ofour  country,  no  less  than  the  rights  of  our  citizens,  must 
dictate  and  require.’1 

The  Saffm  memorial  is  even  more  explicit: 

“These  obstructions  are  of  a  very  serious  nature.  When 
exercised  in  the  mildest  form,  they  produce  oppressive  searches 


^and  delays,  expensive  litigation,  and  often  a  total  failure  of  an 
otherwise  lucrative  voyage  ” 

They  speak  of  the  British  policy, 

“As  letting  loose  the  passions  to  prey  on  the  miseries  and 
plunder  the  property  of  the  innocent.  It  would  subject  neu¬ 
trals  to  hazards  nearly  as  perilous  as  those  of  actual  hostilities; 
and  independent  of  its  influence  in  stimulating  to  revenge  and 
retaliation,  it  would  transfer  the  benefits  of  peace  to  any  victori¬ 
ous  usurper  of  the  ocean.  Your  memorialists  wish  to  take  no 
part  in  the  contests  which  now  convulse  the  world;  but,  ac'ing 
with  impartiality  towards  all  nations,  to  reap  the  fruits  of  a  just 
neutrality.  If,  however,  conciliation  cannot  effect  the  purpose 
of  justice,  and  an  appeal  to  arms  be  the  last  and  necessary  pro¬ 
tection  of  honor,  they  feel  no  disposition  to  decline  the  common 
danger,  or  shrink  from  the  common  contribution.  Relying  on 
the  wisdom  and  firmness  of  the  General  Government  in  this  be¬ 
half,  they  feel  no  hesitation  to  pledge  their  lives  and  properties 
in  support  of  the  measures  which  may-  be  adopted  to  vindicate 
the  public  rights  and  redress  the  public  wrongs.” 

Similar  memorials  emanated  from  New  York, 
Philadelphia,  and  Baltimore,  and  from  almost  eve- 
ly  commercial  city  in  the  Union.  .  The  uniform 
tenor  of  the  public  press  was  in  strict  accordance 
with  the  prayers  of  these  petitions.  Press  after 
press  called  upon  the  Government  to  redress  the 
grievances  of  which  ihe  merchants,  without, dis¬ 
tinction  of  party,  complained,  and  in  the  most 
solemn  manner,  and  in  repeated  instances,  plighted 
their  faith  to  the  support  of  any  measures  to  ac¬ 
complish  the  object.  On  the  22d  of  June,  1807,  the 
wanton  attack  was  made  on  the  Chesapeake  by  the 
.Leopard,  in  consequence  of  the  refusal  of  Commo¬ 
dore  Barron  to  submit  to  the  claimed  right  of 
.search,  and  to  deliver  up  four  sailors  on  board  the 
former,  in  pursuance  of  the  iniquitous  demand  of 
the  British  officer.  This-  raised  the  excitement  to 
the  highest  pitch  of  indignation.  All  parlies  alike, 
the  Federalists  as  much  as  the  Democrats,  cla¬ 
mored  for  reparation,  with  just  abhorrence,  of  the 
insult  offered  to  our  national  flag. 

The  excitement  was  so  great  it  was  deemed  im¬ 
politic  and  unwise  to  convene  Congress  until  suffi¬ 
cient  time  had  elapsed  for  reflec'ion,  and  £or  the 
resentments  of  the  public  mind  to  subside.  In  the 
mean  time,  to  quiet  the  alarm  which  very  generally 
prevailed,  and  to  protect  the  interests  and  honor  of 
the  country  from  a  repeti'ion  of  such  flagrant  pro¬ 
ceedings  within  our  own  jurisdiction,  the  President 
issued  the  proclamation  of  the  second  of  July,  for¬ 
bidding  British  vessels  of  war  in  certain  cases  and 
under  certain  limitations  to  enter  or  remain  ia  the 
ports  or  harbors  of  the  United  States.  This  was 
a  mere  precautionary  step  to  guard  against. similar 
outrages  until  Congress  could  be  convened.  The 
whole  subject  of  our  relations  with  Great  Britain 
was  submitted  to  Congress  at  the  extra  session,  on 
the  26th  of  October  following;  the  embargo  became 
a  law  on  ;the  22d  of  December,  1807.  No  man 
dare  risk  his  veracity,  or  his  intelligence,  by  af¬ 
firming  that  this  measure  was  not  adopted  to  meet 
the  complaints  of  the  Federal  merchants, ,  and  to 
prepare  the  way  for  a  redress  of  their  grievance? 
so  vividly  set  forth  in  their  memorials.  It  now  be¬ 
comes  necessary  to  inquire  how  far  these  patriotic 
citizens,  who  have  so  much  regard  for  ihe  military 
reputation  of  their  candidate  for  the  Presidency, 
lived  up  to  their  professions — how  far  they  re¬ 
deemed  their  hollow  and  deceptive  pledges  to  the 
country  and  ihe  world,  and  with  what  sincerity  they 
staked  their  lives  and  property  in  support  of  the  mea¬ 
sures  which  should  be  adopted  to  vindicate  the  pub¬ 
lic  rights  and  redress  the  pub'ic  wrongs.  The  truth 
is,  they  fulfilled  no  one  of  them,  and  never  designed 


to  do  so  when  they  were  made.  It  was  all  a  sham, 
and  pretence  of  patriotism  which  they  never  felr, 
and  was  put  forth  for  the  purpose  of  deceiving  the 
people,  and  aiding  their  party  to  power  and  place, 
at  the  expense  of  the  real  friends  of  the  country. 
It  was  a  part  of  that  system  which  has  fastened, 
upon  them  the  name  of  “the  war  party  in  peace, 
and  ihe  peace  party  in  war.”  One  of  the  best  in¬ 
formed  writers  of  that  day  remarks  that  “ihe  clear, 
indispuiable,  and  melancholy  fact  is,  that,  after 
having  impelled  and  goaded  the  Government  into 
measures  to  procure  redress,  they  not  merely  with¬ 
held  their  support  from  those  measures,  but  actu¬ 
ally,  as  far  as  depended  on  them,  prevented  their 
success.”  After  they  had  formally  resolved  “that 
the  suffering  armed  vessels  to  station  themselves 
off  our  harbors,  and  there  to  stop,  search 
and  capture  our  vessels— to  impress,  wound,  and 
murder  oar  citizens — is  a  gross  and  criminal  ne¬ 
glect  of  the  highest  duties  of  Government,  and  that 
an  administration  that  patiently  permits  the -same 
is  not  entitled  to  the  confidence  of  the  people” — 
when  that  Administration,  in  the  mildest  manner 
possible,  attempted  to  seek  redress  of  the  very 
wrongs  which  they  had  so  feelingly  por.rayed*  the 
leaders  of  the  Federal  party,  in  spite  of  their  boast¬ 
ed  patriotism,  turned  round  and  denounced  the  Ad¬ 
ministration  which  they  had  just  before  reproached 
for  its  supineness,  and,  in  the  violence  of  their  op¬ 
position,  actually  coalesced  with  the  common  foe, 
to  defeat  and  paralyze  every  erlort  to  redress  the 
very  grievances  of  which  they  had  complained. 
But  it  is  my  principal  object,  as  already  stated,  to 
p  ove  what  I  allege;  for  which  purpose,  I  shall  be 
obliged  to  read  sundry  extracts  from  the  leading 
newspapers  of  that  per.od,  which  seem  to  me  to 
afford  strong  evidence  of  the  motives  and  designs 
of  the  Federal  party,  especially  of  its  leaders;  and 
also  to  refer  to  sundry  letters  and  proceedings 
which  appear  to  be,  equally  corroborative  of  the 
same  points. 

“Every  man  will  presume  that  he  is  hot  bound  to  regard  it 
(the  embargo,)  but  may  send  liis  produce  or  his  merchandise 
to  a  foreign  market  in  the  same  manner  as  if  the  Government 
had  not  undertaken  to  prohibit  it.” — Boston  Centinet. 

“Weknow  if  the  embargo  be  not  removed,  our  citizens  will, 
ere  long,  set  its  penalties  and  restrictions  at  defiance.  It  be¬ 
hooves  us  to  speak;  for  strike  we  must,  if  speaking  does  not  an¬ 
swer.  Boston  Repertory ... 

“It  is  better  to  suffer  the  amputation  of  a  limb  than  to  lose  the 
whole  body.  We  must  prepare  for  the  operation.  Wherefore, 
then,  is  New  England  asleep?  Wherefore  does  she  submit  to  the 
oppression  of  enemies  in  the  South?  Have  we  no  Moses,  who  is 
inspired  by  the  God  of  our  fathers,  and  will  lead  us  out  of  the 
land  of  Egypt.  ”r— Boston  Gazette. 

“This  perpetual  embargo  being  unconstitutional,  every  man 
will  perceive  that  he  is  not  bound  to  regard  it.  If  the  petitions 
do  not  produce  a  relaxation,  the  people  ought  immediately  to 
assume  a  higher  tone.  The  Government  of  Massachusetts  has 
also  a.  dutv  to  perform.  This  state  is  still  sovereign  and  inde¬ 
pendent.” — Boston  Centincl. 

“In  my  mind,  the  present  crisis  excites  the  most  serious  ap¬ 
prehension.  A  storm  seems  to  be  gathering,  which  portends, 
not  a  tempest  on  the  ocean,  but  domestic  convulsions.  I  feel 
mysslfbound  in  conscience  to  declare,  lest,  the  blood  of  tnose 
who  should  fall  in  the  execution  of  this  masure(the  embargo) 
.may  lie  on  my  head,  that  I  consider  this  to  be  an  act  which  di¬ 
rects  a  mortal  blow  at  the  liberties  of  my  country;  an  act  con¬ 
taining  unconstitutional  provisions  to  which  the  people  are  not 
bound  to  submit,  and  to  which,  in  my  opinion,  they  will  not  sub¬ 
mit.” — Speech  of  Mr  Iiillhou.se.  . 

This  subject  might  be  pursued  much  further;  but 
(he  lateness  of  the  hour  admonishes  me  of  the  ne¬ 
cessity  of  brevity.  But  I  cannot  forbear  to  giv*-*  one 
I  nacre  extract,  to  show  the  aim  and  object  o:  all 


9\«V 

2>6  9 


this  clamor  and  complaint,  without  even  proposing 
any  substitute.  It  is  characteristic  of  Federal  po¬ 
licy  to  find  fault  with  every  thing,  and  propose  no¬ 
thing:  , 

“The  original  embargo  act  had  been  openly  and  frequently 
violated.  The  public  pfints  in  Boston  had  audaciously  and  se¬ 
ditiously  invited  the  citizens  to  set  it  at  defiance.  The  British 
Government  had  also,  as  we  have  seen,  added  the  allurement 
of  its  powerful  invitation.  Such  an  invitation  was  unneces¬ 
sary.  There  are  always  to  be  found,  in  every  community,  men 
who  will  seek  the  shortest  road  to  fortune,  whether  through  the 
dark  paths  of  smuggling  or  otherwise;  and  these  men  united 
their  obstreperous  brawlings  with  the  clamor  raised  by  those 
whose  grand  object  was  to  harass  the  Government  for  the 
chance  of  regaining  the  power  they  had  lost.” — M.  Carey. 

This  shows  in  very  admirable  colors  the  conun u- 
aity  of  interest  which  then  existed  between  the 
office  seeker  and  the  speculator,  and  evinces  the  ve¬ 
nality  of  motive  which,  governed  their  actions,  and 
prompted  their  efforts  to  overthow  the  Govern¬ 
ment  of  the  people.  One  more  reference  on  this 
v  point,  and  I  have  done : 

“You  have  reposed  confidence  in  a  coward  [Jefferson]  and 
leaned  on  a  broken  stall'  too  long.  The  day  of  political  proba- 
tion  is  fast  Verging  to  a  close,  when  the  fate  of  America  will  be 
decided,  and  laurels,  bought  with  the  price  of  freemen’s  blood, 
will  grace  the  brows  of  the  Gallic  tyrant.  Let  every  man  who 
holds  the  name  of  America  dear  to  him,  stretch' out  his  hand 
and  put  this  accursed  thing  [the  embargo]  forever  from  him.  Be 
resolute — act  like  the  sons  of  liberty,  of  God,  and  your  country — 
nerve  your  arms  with  vengeance  against  the  despot  who  would 
wrest  the  inestimable  germ  of  your  independence  from  you,  and 
you  shall  be  conquerors.  Give  ear  no  longer  to  the  syren 
song  of  Democracy  and  Jeffersonian  liberty;  it  is  a  cursed  delu¬ 
sion,  adopted  by  traitors  and  recommended  by  syconhants. 
Jefferson,  the  man  who,  with  the  dagger  of  popular  confidence, 
first  gave  the  stroke  to  your  libert  esS’—Newburybort  Cir¬ 
cular. 

It  was  during  the  period  of  these  publications 
that  the  leaders  of  the  Federal  party  in  New 
England  are  believed  to  have  plotted  the  dissolu¬ 
tion  of  the  Union,  and  (he  establishment  of  a 
Northern  confederacy  upon  its  ruins.  The  excite¬ 
ment  was  carried  to  the  utmost  pitch  of  exaspera¬ 
tion.  The  press  teemed  wiih  calumny  and 
falsehood  levelled  at  the  President  and  his  admi¬ 
nistration,  the  principal  object  of  which  was  to 
prove  a  secret  alliance  with  France,  in  her  at¬ 
tempts  to  prostrate  the  power  and  influence  of  the 
British  crown. 

After  the  labored  defence  of  the  gentleman  from 
Massachusetts,  I  hope  I  may  be  excused  for  de¬ 
taining  the  committee  for  a  few  minutes,  while  I 
exhibit  some  of  the  proofs  which  have  induced  the 
opinion  which  he  seems  to  think  is  so  uncharitable. 
It  is  not  necessary  for  me  to  remark  that  I  have  no 
other  knowledge  upon  the  subject,  except  what  is 
available  to  all  who  will  take  the  trouble  to  ex¬ 
amine  it.  In  the  first  place,  I  will  refer  to  the  mis¬ 
sion  of  John  Henry:  * 

Mr.  Ryland ,  Secretary  to  Sir  James  Craig ,  late  Governor 

General  of  the  British  Provinces  in  North  America .  to 

Mr.  Henry. 

(Most  secret  and  confidential.) 

“Quebec,  .Tan.  26, 1809. 

“My  Dear  Sir:  The  extraordinary  state  of  thmgs  at  this 
time  in  the  Eastern  States  has  suggested  to  the  Governor  in 
Chief  the  idea  of  employing  you  on  a  secret  and  confidential 
mission  to  Boston,  provided  an  arrangement  can  be  made  to 
meet  the  important  end  in  view,  without  throwing  an  absolute 
obstacle  in  the  way  of  your  professional  pursuits.  The  infor¬ 
mation  and  political  observations  heretofore  received  from  you, 
were  transmitted  by  his  Excellency  to  the  Secretary  of  State, 
who  has  expressed  his  particular  approbation  of  them,”  &c. 

From  the  instructions  of  J.  H.  Craig  to  Mr.  Henry. 

(“Most  secret  and  confidential.) 

“Quebec,  6th  February,  1808. 

“The  principal  object  that  I  recommend  to  your  attention  is 

the  endeavor  to  obtain  the  most  accurate  information  of  the 


truestate  of  affairs  in  that  part  of  the  Union  which,  from,  itsr 
wealth,  the  number  of  its  inhabitants,  and  the  known  intelli¬ 
gence  of  several  of  its  leading  wen,  must  naturally  possess  a 
very  considerable  influence  over,  and  will  indeed  probably  lead 
the  other  Eastern  States  of  America  in  the  part  they  may  take 
at  this  important  crisis.  I  think  it  necessary  to  put  you  on  your 
guard  against  the  sanguineness  of  an  aspiring  party.  The  Fe¬ 
deralists,  as  I  understand,  have  at  all  times  discovered  a  leaning 
to  this  disposition,  and  their  being  under  its  particular  influence 
at  this  moment,  is  the  more  to  be  expected  from  their  having 
no  ill  (well)  founded  ground  for  their  hopes,  of  being  nearer  the 
attainment  of  their  object,  than  they  have  been  for  some  years 
past.  Tt  has  been  supposed  that  if  the  Federalists  of  the  Eastern 
States  should  be  successful  in  obtaining  that  decided  influence 
which  may  enable  them  to  direct  public  opinion,  it  is  not  im¬ 
probable  that,  rather  than  submit  to  the  continuance  of  the  diffi¬ 
culties  and  distress  to  which  they  are  now  subject,  they  will  ex¬ 
ert  that  influence  to  bring  about,  a  separation  from  the  general 
Union.  The  earliest  information  on  this  subject  may  be  ot 
great  consequence  to  our  Government,  as  it  may  also  be  that 
it  should  be  informed  how  far,  in  such  an  event,  they  would 
look  to  England  for  assstiance,  or  be  disposed  to  enter  into  a 
connection  with  us.” 

Credential  from  Sir  James  Craig  to  Mr.  Henry. 

“The  bearer,  Mr.  John  Henry,  is  employed  by.  me,  and  full 
confidence  may  be  placed  in  him  for  any  communication  which, 
any  person  may  wish  to  make  to  me  in  the  business  committed 
to  him.  In  faith  of  which,  I  have  given  him  this  under  my 
hand  and  seal  at  Quebec,  the  6th  day  of  February,  1809. 

“J.  H.  CRAIG.” 

In.  pursuance  of  this  commission,  Mr.  Henry 
proceeded  to  the  Eastern  States,  in  prosecution  of 
the  design,  which  very  clearly  appears  from  the 
cautious  and  stealthy  language  of  his  letter  of  in¬ 
structions.  The  following  are  extracts  from  his 
correspondence,  which  evinces,  beyond  controver¬ 
sy,  the  brilliant  hopes  he  entertained  of  success, 
and  the  accuracy  of  his  informatior>*as  to  the  tem¬ 
per  and  disposition  of  parties  in  this  country: 

“I  learn  that  the  Governor  of  this  State  (Vermont)  is  now 
visiting  the  towns  in  the  northern  sections  of  it,  and  makes  no 
secret  of  his  determination,  as  commander-in-chief  of  the  mi¬ 
litia,  to  refuse  obedience  to  any  command  from  the.  General 
Government,  which  can  terid  to  interrupt  the  good  understand¬ 
ing  that  prevails  between  the  citizens  of  Vermont  and  his  Ma¬ 
jesty’s  subjects  in  Canada.” 

Again,  he  says: 

“Notwithstanding,  while  there  is  every  reason  to  hope  that 
the  Northern  States,  in  their  distinct  capacity,  wit!  unite,  and 
resist  by  force  a  wav  with  great  Britain,  great  pains  are  taken, 
by  men  of  talents  and  intelligence  to  confirm  the  fears  of  the 
common  people  as  to  the  concurrence  of  the  Southern  Demo¬ 
crats  in  the  projects  of  France,  and  every  thing  tends  to  en¬ 
courage  the  belief  that  the  dissolution  of  the  Confederacy  will 
be  accelerated  by  that  spirit  which  now  actuates  both  parties.’3  s'% 
In  another  letter,  he  observes: 

“The  Federal  party  declare,  that,  in  the  event  of  a  war,  the 
State  of  Vermont  will  treat  separately  for  itself  with  Great  Bri¬ 
tain,  and  support,  to  the  utmost  of  the  stipulations  into  which 
it  may  enter,  without  any  regard  to  the  policy  of  the  Ge¬ 
neral  Government.” 

Under  date  of  March  5,  1809,  he  says: 

“I  have  sufficient  means  of  information  to  enable  me  to  judge 
of  the  proper  period  for  offering  the  co-operation  of  Great  Bri¬ 
tain,  and  opening  a  correspondence  between  the  Governor-Ge¬ 
neral  of  British  America  and  those  individuals  who,  from  the 
partthey  take  in  the  opposition  to  the  National  Government,  or 
the  influence  they  may  possfess  in  any  new  order  of  things  that 
may  grow  out  of  the  present  difference,  should  be  qualified  to 
act  in  behalf  of  the  Northern  States.” 

Boston,  March  7,  he  again  writes: 

“I  have  already  given  a  decided  opinion  that  a  declaration  of 
war  is  not  to  he  expected;  but,  contrary  to  all  reasonable  calcu¬ 
lations,  should  the  Congress  possess  spirit  and  independence 
enough  to  place  their  popularity  in  jeopardy  by  so  strange  a 
measure,  the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts  will  give  the  tone  to 
the  neighboring  States — will  declare  itself  permanent  until  a 
new  election  of  members— invite  a'  Congress,  to  be  composed  of 
delegates  from  the  Federal  States,  and  effect  a  separate  Go¬ 
vernment  for  their  common  defence  and  common  interest. 

This  Congress  would  probably  besin  by  abrogating  the  offen¬ 
sive  laws,  and  adopting  a  plan  of  Government  for  the  mainte¬ 
nance  of  the  power  and  authority  assumed.  They  would,  by 
such  an  act,  be  in  a  condition  to  make  or  receive  proposals 
from  Great  Britain.” 

This  letter  discloses  a  very  remarkable  fact, 
which  cannot  be  nassed  over  without  notice.  Five- 


nyo 

19  ;>  it 


years  before  the  time  of  the  Hartford  Convention, 
this  British  agent  informs  his  superior  of  the  out¬ 
line  of  the  plan  which  was  subsequently  attempted, 
and  partly  carried  into  success,  and  which  migh> 
have  succeeded  at  the  adjourned  meeting  which 
wasto  have  been  held  in  the  following  summer, 
but  for  the  triumph  of  our  arms  at  the  battle  of 
New  Orleans,  and  the  news  of  the  treaty  of  peace 
that  immediately  succeeded.  He  states  not  only 
some  of  the  important  details  of  the  convention, 
as  it  actually  took  place,  several  years  after,  but 
the  motives  that  would  induce  it,  and  the  general 
objects  that  were  to  be  accomplished,  one  of  which 
was  a  separate  Government  for  their  common  de¬ 
fence  and  common  interest. 

It  is  unreasonable  to  believe  that  this  informa¬ 
tion  was  manufactured  for  the  purpose  of  deceiv¬ 
ing  his  employer;  and  especially  is  it  so,  as  the 
facts  and  speculations  which  he  communicates 
have  since  become  matters  of  history,  at  least  to  a 
very  considerable  extent,  and  doubtless  would  have 
been  fully  attempted,  if  not  successfully  carried 
into  operation,  but  for  the  providential  events  of 
which  I  have  spoken,  that  prevented  their  execu¬ 
tion,  and  overwhelmed  their  projectors  with  eter¬ 
nal  disgrace  and  infamy.  But,  sir,  I  have  other 
testimony  equally  conclusive,  if  not  of  a  higher 
nature,  that  I  will  submit  to  the  committee,  with¬ 
out  remark  or  commentary: 

Mr.  Jefferson  to  Mr,  Giles,  Dec  25,  1825. 

“  He  (Mr.  Adams)  spoke  then  of  the  dissatisfaction  of  the 
Eastern  portion  of  ouv  confederacy  with  the  restraints  of  the 
embargo  then  existing,  and  their  restlessness  under  it.  That 
there  was  nothing  which  might  not  be  attempted  to  rid  them- 
selves  of  it.  That  he  had  information  of  the  most  unques¬ 
tionable  irtainty.  that  certain  citizens  ofthe  Eastern  States  (I 
think  he  named Masaschus&ts  particularly)  were  in  negotiation 
with  the  agents  of  the  British  Government,  The  object  of 
which  was  an  agreement  that  the  New  England  States  should 
take  no  further  part  in  the  war  then  going  on;  that  without, 
formally  declaring  their  separation  from  the  Union  ofthe  States, 
they  should  withdraw  from  all  aid  and  obedience  to  them;  that 
their  navigation  and  commerce  should  be  free  ftom  restraint  or 
interruption  by  the  British;  that  they  should  be  considered  and 
treated  by  them  as  neutrals,  and,  as  such,  might  conduct  them¬ 
selves  towards  both  parties;  and,  at  the  close  ofthe  war,  be  at 
liberty  to  rejoin  the  confederacy.  He  assured  me  that  there 
was  imminent  danger  that  the  convention  would  take  place; 
that  the  temptations  were  such  as  might  debauch  many  from 
their  fidelity  to  the  Union;  and  that,  to  enable  its  friends  to 
made  head  against  it,  the  repeal  of  the  embargo  was  absolutely 
necessary.  I  expressed  a  justsense  of  the  merit  ofthe  informa¬ 
tion,  and  of  the  importance  of  theflisclosure  to  the  safety,  and 
even  salvation,  of  our  country;  and,  however  reluctant  I  was  to 
abandon  the  measure,  (a  measure  which,  persevered  in  a  little 
longer, we  had  subsequent  and  satisfactory  assurance,  would 
have  effected  its  object  completely,)  from  that  moment,  and  in¬ 
fluenced  by  that  information,  I  saw  the  necessity  of  abandoning 
it,  and,  instead  of  our  effecting  our  purpose  by  this  peaceful 
weapon,  we  must  fight  it  out,  or  break  the  Union.” 

Extract  of  an  authorized  statement  by  Mr.  Adams ,  in  ex¬ 
planation,  published  in  the  National  Intelligencer ,  Octo¬ 
ber  21,  1828- 

“Mv.  Giles,  and  several  other  members  pf  Congress,  during 
this  session  (1808)  wrote  to  Mr.  Adams  confidential  letters,  in¬ 
forming  him  of  the  various  measures  proposed  as  reinforce¬ 
ments  or  substitutes  for  the  embargo,  and  soliciting  his  opinions 
upon  the  subject.  He  answered  those  letters  with  frankness 
and  in  confidence.  He  earnestly  recommended  the  substitution 
ofthe  non-intercourse  for  theemb'argo;  and,  in  giving  his  rea¬ 
sons  for  this  preference,  was  necessarily  led  to  enlarge  upon  the 
views  and  purposes  of  certain  leaders  of  the  party  which  had 
the  management  of  the  State  Legislature  in  their  hands.  He 
urged  that  continuance  of  the  embargo  much  longer  would  cer¬ 
tainly  be  met  by  forcible  resistance,  supported  by  the  Legisla¬ 
ture,  and  probably  by  the  Judiciary  of  the  State. 

“That  to  quell  that  resistance,  if  force  should  be'resorted  to  by 
the  Government,  it  would  produce  a  civil  war;  and  in  that 
event,  he  had  no  doubt  that  the  leaders  «f  the  party  would  secure 
the  co-operation  with  them  of  Great  Britain.  That,  their  object 
was,  and  had  been  for  several  years,  a  dissolution  of  the  Union, 


and  the  establishment  of  a  separate  confederation,  he  knew 
from  unequivocal  evidence,  although  not  proveable  in  a  court 
of  law;  and  that,  in  the  case  of  a  civil  war,  the  aid  of  Great 
Britain  to  effect  that  purpose  would  be  as  surely  resorted  to,  as 
it  would  be  indispensably  necessary  to  the  design.” 

All  who  remember  the  period  when  this  sta'e- 
ment  made  its  appearance,  eaqnot  have  forgotten 
the  excitement  which  it  produced  in  New  England, 
and  especially  among  the  Boston  Federalist-,  who, 
at  the  time,  were  among  the  most  devoted  support¬ 
ers  of  Mr.  Adams.  The  press  took  up  the  sub¬ 
ject,  and  demanded  of  the  individuals  whose  situa¬ 
tion  was  such,  at  the  period  alluded  to,  as  to  desig¬ 
nate  them  among  the  persons  included  in  the  charge, 
to  call  upon  Mr.  Adams  for  some  more  specific 
statement  of  the  accusation.  A  writer  in  the  Bos¬ 
ton  Courier  says: 

“This  we,  the  Federal  party,  the  citizens  of  Massachusetts, 
the  people  of  New  England,  require  of  them.  VVeare  all  im¬ 
plicated  in  the  accusation,  and  ail  feel  its  effects;  nor  can  we 
rest  satisfied  until  it  is  brought  home  to  individuals,  or  scattered 
to  the  winds.” 

On  the  26th  of  November,  1828,  Harrison  G. 
Otis  and  twelve  others,  all  leading  Federalists  in 
Massachusetts,  most  of  whom  are  still  living  and 
aciive  members  of  the  Whig  party,  addressed  a 
communication  to  Mr.  Adams,  calling  for  the 
names  of  the  persons  charged,  and  the  evidence 
upon  which  the  charge  rests.  Among  other  things, 
they  say: 

“We  were  associated  in  politics  with  the  party  prevailing 
here  at  the  period  referred  to  in  the  statement  above  mentioned; 
some  of  us  concurred  in  all  the  measures  adopted  by  that  party; 
and  we  all  warmly  approved  and  supported  them.  Many  ot 
our  associates,  who  still  survive,  are  dispersed  throughout  Mas¬ 
sachusetts  and  Maine,  and  could  not  be  easily  convened,  to  joia 
us  on  the  present  occasion.” 

Mr.  Adams’s  reply,  under  date  of  the  26th  of 
December,  is  very  full  and  explicit;  from  which  I 
beg  leave  to  read  a  few  extracts: 

“It was  in  those  letters  of  180S  and  1899,  that  I  mentioned  the 
design  of  certain  leaders  of  the  Federal  party,  and  the  esta¬ 
blishment  of  a  Northern  confederacy,  &c. 

“This  plan  was  so  far  matured,  that  the  proposal  had  been 
made  to  an  individual,  at  the  proper  time,  to  be  placed  at  the 
head  of  the  military  movement  which,  it  was  foreseen,  would 
be  necessary  for  carrying  it  into  execution. 

“The  interposition  of  a  kind  Providence  averted  the  most  de¬ 
plorable  of  catastrophes,  and  turning  over  to  the  receptacle  of 
things  lost  upon  earth,  the  adjourned  convention  from  Hartford 
to  Boston,  extinguished  (by  the  mercy  of  heaven,  may  it  be 
forever!)  the  projected  New  England  Confederacy.” 

la  conclusion,  he  intimates  very  strongly,  that  at 
some  future  day,  a  sense  of  duty  may  induce  him 
to  disclose  the  evidence  which  he  possesses,  and. 
for  which  they  call,  but  says,  the  selection  of  the 
day  must  be  left  to  his  own  judgment — that  no  ar¬ 
ray  of  numbers  or  power  can  induce  him  to  make 
the  disclosure  prematurely,  or  to  wilhhold  it  “when 
a  sense  of  duty  shall  sound  the  alarm.1"  It  has 
already  appeared  that  Mr.  Jefferson  and  his  party 
were  obliged  to  abandon  the  embargo,  to  save  the 
Union  from  the  treasonable  designs  of  the  Federal 
party  in  the  Eastern  States.  Non-intercourse  was 
substituted,  on  the  first  of  March,  1809.  This  act 
met  with  little  or  no  better  reception.  It  was,  at  once, 
denounced  as  having  been  dictated  by  French  in¬ 
fluence,  and  as  a  measure  of  hostility  to  England. 
The  cry  of  French  influence  and  Southern  influ¬ 
ence  were  the  principal  weapons  of  Federal  war¬ 
fare,  in  the  North,  throughout  the  period  of  which  I 
am  speaking.  After  the  failure  of  Mr.  Erskine’s 
arrangement,  the  bitterness  of  party  feeling  was 
resumed,  if  it  can  be  said  to  have  subsided,  while 
it  was  believed  that  the  overtures  he  had  made 


would  fee  sanctioned  by  the  British  Cabinet.  Upon, 
this  point,  I  desire  to  make  one  or  two  remarks,  toj 
show  the  disengenuousness  and  insincerity  of  Fede-I 
ral  Opposition,  and  then  I  will  pass  on  with  as  i 
much  rapidity  as  possible.  While  it  was  sup-  j  teok  place,  but  was  turned  “over  to  the  receptacle- 


VCi 

country  until  after  the  battle  at  New  Orleans. 
The  Hartford  Convention  assembled  on  the  15th 
of  December,  1814,  and  adjourned  to  meet  at  Bos¬ 
ton  in  the  following  June,  which  meeting  never 


posed  that  the  arrangement  had  been  made  by  au-% 
thority,  they  openly  charged  that  it  was  precisely 
what  the  British  Government  had  always  betn 
willing  to  do;  but  the  moment  it  was  ascertained 
that  it  had  been  rejected  upon  the  pretence  that  the 
Minister  had  tianscended  his  powers,  with  charac¬ 
teristic  regard  for  truth,  they  unblushingly  averted 
that  Mrs  Madison  knew,  at  the  time,  that  no  such 


of  things  lost  upon  earth.”  The  victory  of  Nevr 
Orleans,  and  the  treaty  of  peace,  made  the  triumph 
of  the  Democratic  party  complete.  No  language 
can  describe  their  joy.  The  Federalists  were  over¬ 
whelmed,  as  well  by  the  successful  termination  of 
the  conflict,  as  by  the  knowledge  of  the  odium 
which  would  attach  to  their  treasonable  opposition. 
It  is  a  little  remarkable  that  the  gentleman  from 


instructions  had  been  given,  and  that  he  had  frau-  j  Massachusetts  [Mr.  Sai.tonstall]  should  suppose 


dulently  consented  to  the  arrangement,  to  deceive 
the  people,  and  gain  popularity.  The  press  made 
this  charge,  and  the  minions  of  party  joined  in.  the 
cry.  It  soon  became  evident  that  hostilities  must 
ensue,  as  all  peaceful  efforts  to  obtain  justice  had 
been  exhausted,  without  any  success.  All  parties 
again  demanded  redress, and  none  were  more  clamo¬ 
rous  than  those  that  subsequently  opposed  the  war 
with  so  much  violence  and  rancor.  It  was  said  that 
the  Administration  wanted  energy,  and  that  all  the 
difficulty  was  justly  chargeable  to  its  weakness 
and  corruption,  and  no  expression  Was  more  com¬ 
mon  with  these  patriotic  citizens  than  the  one  as¬ 
cribed  to  their  leader  in  Congress,  that  the  Admi¬ 
nistration  “could  not  be  kicked  into  a  war,.”  They 
urged  the  Government  on  to  the  brink  of  hostili¬ 
ties,  by  complaints  and  reproaches  of  the  most 
vindictive  character,  until  it  was  impossible  to  re¬ 
cede,  without  sacrifice  both  of  the  rights  and  honor 
of  the  nation;  and  when  the  issue  was  presented, 


that  the  overthrow  of  Napoleon,  at  the  battle  of 
'  Waterloo,  induced  the  Federal  party  to  disband. 
That  battle  did  not  take  place  until  the  following 
season.  It  was  another  great  and  glorious  victory, 
on  this  side  of  the  ocean,  which  seems  to  have  es¬ 
caped  his  recollection,  that  compelled  the  leaders 
of  that  party,  at  least  for  the  lime,  to  abandon 
their  projects  of  ambition,  and  to  acquiesce  in  the 
ascendency  of  the  favorites  of  the  people. 

The  next  eight  years  succeeding  the  war,  has 
been  called  the  “  era  of  good  feeling, ’’’during  which 
the  Federal  party  endeavored  to  wipe  off,  by  every 
species  of  obsequiousness,  the  disgrace  of  their  past 
misdeeds,  without  any  change  of  their  cherished, 
principles.  Party  organization  was  abandoned, 
and  of  course  the  animosity  of  feeling  which  had 
long  prevailed,  subsided.  These  “no  party  times, 
as  they  have  been  called,  continued,  at  least  in 
New  England,  until  the  election  of  John  G,.  Adams 
by  the  IJouse  of  Representatives.  The  events 


and  no  alternative  left  but  dishonor,  they  not  |  which  led  to  that  result  are  familiar  to  all,  and 
only  voted  against  the  declaration  of  war,  but  ini-  (  need  not  be  recapitulated.  Admit,  if  you  please. 


mediately  adopted  an  inflammatory  address  to  ex¬ 
cite  the  people  to  oppose  it.  Their  opposition  dur¬ 
ing  the  war  is  so  well  known,  and  so  universally 
execrated,  that  it  is  not  necessary  to  dwell  upon  it. 
The  Federal  party,  in  Massachusetts,  were  more 
rancorous  and  uncharitable  in  their  opposition  than 
in  any  State  in  the  Union.  They  declared,  in  the 
form  of  a  legis'ative  declaration,  that  “the  war 
was  founded  in  falsehood,  declared  without  neces¬ 
sity,  and  its  real  object  was  extent  of  territory,  by 
unjust  conquests,  and'to  aid  the  late  tyrant  of 
Europe  in  his  view  of  aggrandizement.”  Such 
declaratory  resolutions  were  a  very  frequent  oc¬ 
currence,  though,  I  believe,  they  did  not  require  the 
sanction  of  both  branches  of  tne  Legislature. 

It  would  be  an  endless  task,  as  well  as  useless 
labor,  to  recite  all  the  evidences  of  the  reckless  op¬ 
position  to  ihe  war.  They  withheld,  as  far  as  it 


for  it  is  true,  that  Mr.  Adams  was  supported  by 
many  of  the-  old  Republicans;  and  it  is  equally  true 
that  the  body  of  the  Federal  party,  aroused  from 
their  lethargy,  rallied  to  his  support.  Shortly 
after  his  election,  the  declaration  was  made,  with 
some  appearance  of  authority,  that  those  who  fell 
with  the  fir.it  Adams  should  rise  with  the  second^ 
and  the  course  of  his  administration  was  supposed' 
to  furnish  ground  for  such  belief.  The  old  party 
feeling  was  aroused  to  a  very  high  degree  of  ex¬ 
citement  at  the  ensuing  Presidential  election;  the 
mass  of  the  Democatic  party  were  embodied  again 
under  the  banner  of  Jeffersonian  principles,  in  op¬ 
position  to  an  Administration  which  commanded 
the  confidence  and  respect  of  the  tariff  and  bank 
party  in  every  quarter  of  the  Union.  It  is  impos¬ 
sible  for  me,  at  this  time,  to  speak  of  the  benefi- 
ial  change  in  the  administration  of.  public  affairs 


was  wi  bin  their  power,  the  means  lor  supporting  j  that  was  introduced  by  General  Jackson.  It  is  re 


the  army  and  navy;  they  dbcou  raged  enlistments 
they  prevented  loans,  and  actually  devised  a  regu¬ 
lar  system  for  exporting  specie  out  of  the  country, 
to  cripple  the  Government,  by  depriving  it  of  the 
sinews  of  war;  and,  when  victory  crownsd  the  ef- 


corded  in  the  grateful  remembrance  of  the  people, 
and  constitutes  one  of  the  brightest  and  most  en¬ 
during  pages  in  the  history  of  the  country. 

The  calumnies  and  falsehoods  that  were  heaped 
upon  that  distinguished  individual,  by  the  old  op- 


forts  of  the  brave,  they  resolved  that  “it  was  unbe-  (  posers  of  Jefferson,  have  gone  to  the  “tomb  of  the 


coming  a  moral  and  religious  people  to  express 
any  approbation  of  military  or  naval  exploits.” 
This  relentless  and  heartless  opposition  was  kept 
up,  with  unabated  fury,  down  to  the  victory  at 
New  Orleans  and  the  subsequent  news  of  the  treaty 
of  peace.  Peace  was  concluded  on  the  24th  of 
December,  1814,  but  the  news  did  not  ieach  this 


Capulets,”  and  it  only  remains  to  complete  the 
parallel,  after  he  shall  have  been  consigned  to  the 
grave,  for  his  enemies  to  pronounce  his  eulogy. 
Professions  of  economy  are  becoming  very  fash¬ 
ionable,  and  a  most  deliberate  attempt  is  made  to 
fasten  upon  the  present  Administration  the  charge 
of  extravagance  in  the  expenditure  of  the  public  mo- 


ney.  Let  no  one  accuse  me  of  undervaluing  any 
just  system  of  economy;  on  the  contrary,  I  hoid  it 
to  be  indispensable,  in  a  Republican  form  of  Go¬ 
vernment,  to  secure  it  from  corruption,  and  all  the 
evil  tendencies  of  monarchial  institutions.  But 
the  appropriate  inquiry  is,  who  are  the  friends  of 
economy,  and  whose  principles,  if  adopted,  will 
lead  to  extravagance?  I  will  give  one  fact  to  illus 
trate  my  views  on  this  subject,  after  remarking 
tha.,  the  only  security  against  improvident  expen¬ 
diture,  is  to  raise  no  more  money  from  the  pock¬ 
ets  of  the  people,  than  is  necessary  to  meet  the 
obligations  of  the  country  upon  the  strictest  princi¬ 
ples  of  frugality.  If  taxes  are  levied  and  collected, 
the  money  will  be  expended;  and,  indeed,  there 
seems  to  be  a  necessity  that  it  should  be,  for  no  one 
will  pretend  that  it  would  be  just  or  wi-e  to  hoard 
up  the  currency,  pr  shut  it  out  of  circulation. 
Hence  the  impolicy  of  a  high  tariff;  for,  if  money 
is  collected  it  must  be  expended,  and  this  engen¬ 
ders  extravagance,  and  tends  to  corruption.  The 
fact  to  which  1  wish  to  call  vour  attention,  is  the 
veto  of  the  Maysville  road  bill. 

It  has  been  said  very  justly,  I  believe,  that,  at 
the  time  when  that  measure  was  arrested  by  the 
moral  courage  of  General  Jackson,  unconsti¬ 
tutional  appropriations  were  contemplated  to  the 
vast  amount  of  cue  hundred  millions  of  dollars,  by 
the  advocates  of  the  system  of  which  that  bill  was 
the  germ.  Some  of  the  friends  of  the  President 
were  alarmed  when  they  learned  his  intention  to 
veto  it,  and  even  went  so  far  as  to  desire  him  to 
yield  to  the  wishes  of  a  majority  of  Congress.  The 
result  is  known.  The  Democratic  party  sustained 
him  with  increased  vigor;  and,  though  a  few  desert¬ 
ed,  the  mass  remained  firm.  This  was  a  specimen 
of  economy  worth  talking  about,  the  influence  of 
which  will  be  felt,  it  is  to  be  hoped,  through  all 
coming  time.  One  would  think  that  the  advocates 
of  this  system  of  wasteful  and  unconstitutional  ex¬ 
penditure  would  be  restrained,  by  a  sense  of  delica¬ 
cy,  from  making  charges  of  extravagance  against 
those  whom  they  have  uniformly  derided  as  the  up¬ 
holders  of  a  niggardly  policy  of  retrenchment.  It 
is  not  denied,  that,  for  a  time,  many  honest  Demo¬ 
crats  were  found  in  opposition  to  that  Administra¬ 
tion,  through  a  feeling  of  distrust  of  the  fitness  or 
prudence  of  the  incumbent,  which  had  been  engen¬ 
dered  by  the  violence  and  wickedness  of  his  op- 
posers,  and  by  the  wide-spread  calumnies  which 
had  been  circulated  for  the  purpose  of  blackening 
his  character  and  blasting  bis  reputation—- a  repu¬ 
tation  which  had  been  earned  in  the  field  of  danger, 
through  toil  and  peril,  in  defence  of  the  honor  and 
glory  of  his  country.  But  as  the  policy  of  his  Ad¬ 
ministration  was  developed,  these  ill-grounded  fears 
were  dissipated  in  the  cheering  exhibitions  of  wis¬ 
dom,  patriotism,  and  sound  Republican  princip'es, 
which  characterized  his  course,  and  furnished 
the  most  gratifying  assurance  of  that  devotion  to 
principle  which  so  signally  marked  his  public  ca¬ 
reer.  At  his  second  election,  the  whole  Demo¬ 
cratic  party  in  New  England,  with  the  exception 
of  a  few  individuals,  who  became  traitors  to  their 
own  principles,  were  united,  and  gave  to  the  hero 
of  New  Orleans  a  generous  and  hearty  support. 
No  one  can  oppose  to  this  declaration  a  successful 
denial.  Each  party  rallied  under  the  respective 


banners  of  their  long  cherished  principles,  and  en¬ 
tered  into  the  contest  with  spirit  and  determination. 
With  very  few  exception s,  the  Federalists  gave 
their  support  to  Mr.  Adams.  It  is  a  veiy  common 
saving,  that  “one  swallow  does  not  make  summer,” 
or,  as  the  legal  maxim  has  it,  that  “a  single  in¬ 
stance  does  not  make  law:”  so,  the  patty  associa¬ 
tion  of  a  few  individuals,  after  the  lapse  of  many 
years,  does  not  afford  any  evidence  of  the  princi¬ 
ples  of  the  party  with  which  they  happen  to  be 
classed,  with  reference  to  a  previous  organization, 
or  the  position  of  the  masses  of  which  that  organi¬ 
zation  was  composed.  I  am  willing  to  admit  that 
a  few  Democrat?  remained,  in  opposition,  and  that, 
generally  speaking,  they  maintain,  to  this  day,  like 
all  traitors,  that  every  body  has  changed  his  prin¬ 
ciples  and  position,  except  themselves;  that,  while 
they  have  stood  firm  and  inflexible,  each  of  the  two 
great  political  parties  of  the  country  has  changed 
sides — that  is,  the  Federalists  have  become  Demo¬ 
crats,  for  their  particular  accommodation,  and  the 
Democrats  have  abandoned  their  cherished  prin¬ 
ciples  and  joined  their  enemies,  although,  if  tie 
story  be  true,  there  was  scarcely  any  one  left  for 
them  to  oin. 

On  the  other  hand,  I  am  not  disposed  to  deny 
that  a  small  portion  of  the  Federal  party  supported 
the  elecion  of  General  Jackson,  most  of  whom 
have  deserted  and  gone  back  to  their  old  asso¬ 
ciates;  and,  wilhout  meaning  any  disrespect  to  in¬ 
dividuals,  it  is  my  sincere  desire  that  they  may  ne¬ 
ver  return  to  make  further  trouble  in  the  Demo¬ 
cratic  ranks.  Those  that  remain,  are  believed  to 
be  sincere,  in  the  change  of  princip'es  which  they 
profess.  Generally  speaking,  they  acknowledge 
their  past  errors*  and  avow  their  change  of  princi¬ 
ple  and  position.  This  I  believe  to  be  the  true 
state  of  the  case.  I  can  speak  with  the  utmost 
confidence,  when  1  say  that  within  the  limit  of  my 
own  acquaintance,  it  is  an  undeniable  fact,  that 
the  mass  of  the  old  Republicans  then  living,  were 
the  warm  and  zealous  supporters  of  the  second 
election  of  President  Jackson,  and  continued 
throughout  to  approve  of  the  principles  and  mea¬ 
sures  of  his  administration;  the  distinctive  features 
of  which  were  a  strict  construction  of  the  Consti¬ 
tution,  opposition  to  a  National  Bank,  the  reduction 
of  the  tariff  and  the  receipts  of  the  Treasury,  as 
far  as  possible  without  injury  to  the  great  interests 
of  the  country,  to  the  wants  of  the  Government 
upon  the  strictest  principles  of  accountability  and 
economy,  and  an  undeviatins  hostility  to  unconsti¬ 
tutional  appropriations  upon  local  objects  of  im¬ 
provement.  That  the  Federal  party  opposed  this 
Administration,  its  principles  and  policy,  with  un¬ 
relenting  and  uncompromising  hostility,  is  suscepti¬ 
ble  of  the  clearest  demonstration,  if  the  fact  does  not 
stand  confessed.  All  the  old  Federal  presses,  includ¬ 
ing  the  Boston  Centinel,  teemed  with  abuse  and 
misrepresentation  of  the  same  reckless  character 
as  had  marked  their  opposition  to  Jefferson  and 
Madison.  But  proof  on  this  point  would  be  a 
work  of  supererogation,  and  therefore  I  will  desist. 
Mv  confidence  in  the  intelligence  of  the  people, 
induces  me  to  believe  that  they  cannot  be  deceived 
in  this  matter,  relating,  as  it  does,  to  events  which 
are  fresh  in  their  recollection.  If  these  things  be 
so,  an  inference  will  follow,  when  one  other  fact  is 


& 


t 


established,  about  which  I  imagine  there  is  still  less 
dispute,  of  great  importance  in  the  inquiry  which  I 
am  pursuing.  The  additional  fact  that  I  wish  to 
establish,  I  presume  no  one  will  deny,  and  there¬ 
fore  does  not  require  proof,  but  may  be  fairly  as¬ 
sumed;  and  it  is,  that  the  supporters,  principles, 
and  policy,  of  the  present  Administration,  are 
identical  wi  h  the  one  that  preceded  it.  It  may  be 
said  that  it  is  in  contemplation  to  substitute  the  In¬ 
dependent  Tieasury  system  for  the  collection,  safe 
keeping,  and  disbursement  of  the  public  money, 
in  the  place  of  the  State  banks;  but  this  does  not 
afford  the  distinction  required.  The  State  banks 
were  selected  as  an  experiment.  It  has  signally 
failed,  through  the  misconduct  and  bad  faith  of  the 
banks  themselves;  and  it  is  well  known,  that,  after 
the  suspension  of  specie  payments  in  1837,  and 
the  refusal  of  the  banks  to  pay  over  nearly  thirty 
millions  of  the  public  money,  which  had  been  col¬ 
lected  from  the  people,  and  deposited  with  the 
banks  for  safe  keeping,  General  Jackson,  no  less 
than  Mr.  Van  Buren,  became  satisfied  that  no 
further  confidence  could  be  reposed  in  them  as  de¬ 
positories  of  the  public  treasure,  and  both  alike  ap¬ 
proved  of  the  new  recommendation  that  was  made, 
and  which,  I  trust,  before  this  session  terminates, 
will  become  the  law  of  the  land.  One  accusation  of 
the  Opposition  is,  therefore,  fully  sustained,  and 
will  be  cheerfully  admitted,  that  Mr.  Van  Buren 
is  “treading  in  the  footsteps  of  his  illustrious  pre¬ 
decessor.”  I  hope  gentlemen  will  not  back  out  of 
tiiis  charge,  because  it  may  be  convenient  to  do  so 
to  avoid  the  consequences  of  an  issue  they 
wish  to  escape.  Will  any  one  undertake 
to  deny  that  the  principles  and  measures  of 
the  two  Administrations  are  the  same  in  all 
the  essential  elements  of  national  policy?  Surely 
no  one  will  attempt  it;  and  that  their  sup¬ 
porters  are  the  same  in  New  England,  with  indi¬ 
vidual  exceptions,  I  appeal  to  every  city,  district, 
and  village  in  that  section  of  country,  for  the  con¬ 
firmation  of  what  I  affirm;  and  I  am  willing  to 
stand  or  fall  before  my  constituents,  upon  the  truth 
of  the  fact  which  I  have  now  stated,  confining  i?s 
application,  of  course,  to  the  limits  of  my  acquaint¬ 
ance,  which  is  not  very  limited,  in  two  or  three 
of  those  States.  Every  member  of  the  Hartford 
Convention  now  living,  is  opposed  to  this  Adminis¬ 
tration.  The  talented  and  distinguished  committee 
that  addressed  Mr.  Adams,  and  called  upon  him 
for  the  evidence  to  sustain  the  charge  he  had 
made  against  themselves,  or  their  associates, 
who  were  “dispersed  throughout  Massachusetts 
and  Maine,”  at  least  so  many  of  them  as  are 
now  living,  are  members  of  the  Whig  party; 
and  the  Boston  Centinel,  and  other  old  Fe¬ 
deral  journals,  constitute  the  leading  organs 
of  that  party  in  the  unparalleled  and  unheard  of 
struggle  to  overthrow  the  present  Democratic  Ad¬ 
ministration;  and  if  all  these  things  be  so,  it  re¬ 
mains  for  the  people  to  determine,  as  they  surely 
will,  who  are  the  followers  of  Jefferson,  and  who 
are  Federalists.  The  principles  of  parties  at  the 
present  time  will  now  be  considered  with  a  little 
more  particularity,  but  with  as  much  brevity  as 
possible.  It  has  already  appeared,  rhat,  throughout 
the  period  of  party  organization,  they  have  been 
separated  by  an  impassable  gulf  in  tieir  views  and 


feelings,  upon  the  construction  of  the  Constitution. 
In  the  progress  of  events,  other  questions,  tempora¬ 
ry  in  their  nature,  have  largely  contributed  to  the 
bitterness  and  acrimony  of  party  strife,  which  at 
times  has  threatened  the  existence  of  the  Union, 
itself;  but  as  these  temporary  causes  of  irritation 
pass  away,  parties  are  seen  to  settle  down  upon  the 
standard  of  principle,  upon  which  the  division 
first  took  place.  Such  is  the  case  at  the  present 
time,  in  spite  of  all  the  efforts  in  certain  quarters 
to  conceal  it.  The  present  contest  is  one  for  prin¬ 
ciple,  and  its  dividing  Jine  is  bottomed  upon  the 
construction  of  the  Constitution  as  leading  to  dif¬ 
ferent  measures  of  policy  in  the  administration  of 
public  affairs.  Of  the  many  essential  grounds  of 
division  between  parties  under  he  existing  organi¬ 
zation,  I  shall  only  be  able  to  speak  of  some  of 
those  which  have  attracted  the  largest  share  of  pub¬ 
lic  attention  under  preceding  Administrations.  This 
Administration,  and  the  party  supporting  it,  are 
opposed  to  a  National  Bank,  believing  it  to  be  both 
unconstitutional  and  inexpedient. 

It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  remark,  that  this 
question  has  lost  nothing  of  the  importance  that 
was  originally  attached  to  it  by  its  early  opposers, 
from  the  lights  of  experience;  but,  on  the  con¬ 
trary,  its  dangerous  tendency  has  been  fully  de¬ 
monstrated,  in  the  fearful  exhibitions  of  the  pow¬ 
erful  and  despotic  sway  over  the  property  and 
liberty  of  the  citizens,  which  such  an  institution  is 
capable  of  exerting,  when  placed  under  the  con¬ 
trol  of  corporate  power,  and  subject  to  the  direc¬ 
tion  of  designing  men.  The  conduct  of  the  late 
Bank  of  the  United  States  is  fresh  in  the  recollec¬ 
tion  of  the  people  of  this  country,  and  need  not  be 
recapitulated.  It  is  sufficient  to  say,  that  the  worst 
fears  and  apprehensions  of  its  opposers  have  been 
realized  to  their  utmost  extent,  and  so  much  so 
that  it  is  my  delibera'e  opinion  that  a  great  majo¬ 
rity  of  the  American  people  have  become  sick  and 
tired  of  the  periodical  fluctuations  in  the  currency, 
which  are  the  inevitable  consequence  of  a  paper 
standard  of  value.  The  reasons  of  this  opinion  E 
will  forbear  to  state,  as  it  would  be  inconsistent 
with  the  general  design  of  my  remarks.  It  is 
more  my  object  to  ascertain  what  are  the  principles 
of  the  Democratic  party,  for  the  purpose  of  con¬ 
trasting  them  with  those  of  the  other  side,  than 
to  detain  the  committee  by  entering  into  a  full 
explanation  and  defence  of  them.  The  soundest 
principles  of  economy,  as  welt  as  of  justice,  are  op¬ 
posed  to  a  high  tariff.  It  is  a  perversion  of  the  taxing 
power  which  wa- confided  to  Congress  by  the  Con¬ 
stitution  for  the  purpose  of  providing  for  the  general 
welfare  of  the  whole  Union,  and  not  for  the 
benefit  of  a  few  individuals  at  the  expense  of  the 
many.  Any  system,  therefore,  which  imposes  bur¬ 
dens  upon  the  body  of  the  people  to  confer  favor 
upon  a  limited  class  of  individuals  or  corporations, 
is  a  perversion  and  infraction  of  the  grant  to  lay 
taxes,  because  it  is  not  to  provide  for  the  generaL 
welfare  of  the  whole,  but  to  adminis'er  to  the  cu¬ 
pidity  and  avarice  of  the  few;  and,  therefore,  any 
exaction  for  the  sole  benefit  of  one  branch  of  in¬ 
dustry,  at  the  expense  of  all  others,  is  a  germ  of 
Federal  construction,  not  authorized  by  the  Con¬ 
stitution,  the  whole  tendency  of  which  is  to  per¬ 
vert  our  Republican  institutions  from  a  state  of 


parity  and  simplicy,  into  a  splendid  system 'of  ftu re  in  every  system  of  national  policy.  Taxes  mast 
national  power,  in  subversion  of  the  rights  of  the  I  be  levied,  in  some  way,  and,  to  a  greater  or  less  ex- 
States,  and  of  the  liberties  of  the  people.  A  strict  tent,  in  all  Government*;  and  the  money  must  be 
constitutional  limitation  of  the  taxing  power,  is  the  collected  and  disbursed  in  one  currency  or  another, 
only  safeguard  against  corruption  and  extrava- 1  The  policy  of  the  Democratic  patty,  in  this  behalf. 


gance.  Henee  the  sleepless  vigilance  of  the  De¬ 
mocratic  party  in  their  opposition  to  an  unautho¬ 
rized  tariff.  The  ftim  and  objects  of  its  projectors 
will  be  hinted  at  hereafter.  Again:  no  one  pre¬ 
tends  that  there  is  any  express  grant  ip  authorize 
the  appropriation  of  the  national  treasure  upon  lo¬ 
cal  objects  of  improvement.  This,  too,  is  based 
upon  construction,  and  is  claimed  by  implication. 
The  Democratic  party  oppose  it  upon  constitu¬ 
tional  grounds,  as  well  as  on  account  of  the  injus¬ 
tice  and  inequality  of  its  operation  upon  the  dif¬ 
ferent  sections  of  the  Union.  It  is  a  gambling, 
log-rolling  system,  calculated  to  corrupt,  the  de¬ 
liberations  of  Congress,  and  to  foster  division  and 
heart  burnings  among  the  several  States  of  the 
Confederacy. 

On  this  point  I  desire  to  be  distinctly  understood. 
It  is  not  the  danger  of  exasperation  of  sectional 
feeling  that  constitutes  the  essential  ground  of  the 
opposition  of  the  Democratic  party  to  this  system, 
for  that  has  reference  to  its  expediency;  but  it  is 
regarded  as  the  exercise  of  an  unauthorized  power, 
contravening  the  Constitution  and  infringing  upon 
the  sovereignty  of  the  States.  There  are  very 
strong  objections  to  it  on  the  score  of  expediency. 
In  addition  to  what  has  been  said,  it  leads  to  un¬ 
necessary  and  exorbitant  taxation,  by  creating  new 
objects  of  appropriation,  without  number  or  bound, 
except  in  the  discretion  of  Congress.  It  has  been 
called  the  sluiceway  of  the  tariff  system,  and  I  do 
not  know  of  a  more  appropriate  name.  The 
friends  of  the  tariff  have  uniformly  supported  it, 
for  the  reason,  undoubtedly,  thst  the  drain  from 
the  Treasury,  which  it  occasions,  would  further 
their  designs.  In  all  its  consequences  it  is  produc¬ 
tive  of  evil,  without  any  counterbalancing  good. 
Again:  the  power  to  collect  monev  to  tiny  amount 
from  the  people  and  to  distribute  it  as  a  matter  of 
favor  to  the  Slates,  or  to  corporations,  is  a  species 
of  despotism  of  the  most  odious  character.  The 
projected  schemes  of  distribution  find  no  favor 
with  the  Democratic  party.  They  have  resisted  it, 
and  will  continue  uf  resist  it,  in  any  and  every  shape 
and  form  in  which  it  may  be  presented,  whether 
under  tha  pretence  of  donation  or  under  the  dis¬ 
guise  of  the  assumption  of  the  State  debts. 

The  policy  to  be  pursued  in  relation  to  the  pub¬ 
lic  domain  demands  the  most  solemn  consideration 
of  the  community,  and  is  likely  to  excite  very  much 
of  public  attention,  for  many  years  to  come,  both 
on  account  of  its  bearing  upon  the  finances  of  the 
country,  and  the  principles  involved  in  the  vari¬ 
ous  schemes  that  have  been  projected  to  divert  the 
accruing  profit  of  the  annua!  sales  from  the  Na¬ 
tion  Treasury.  The  distribution  system  is  the  mo-t 
formidable  and  the  most  dangerous  of  anv  that  has 
been  presented,  on  account  of  the  bait  which  it  of¬ 
fers  to  the  indebted  States.no  less  than  to  the  manu¬ 
facturers,  who  see  that,  if  it  prevails,  it  must  lay 
the  foundation  for  a  very  great  increase  of  taxa¬ 
tion,  and  contribute  very  largely  to  their  interests 
and  designs.  The  mode  of  collecting,  keeping,  and 
disbursing  the  public  money,  is  an  important  fea- 


is  well  known,  though  it  has  been  shamefully  mis¬ 
represented  in  all  its  objects  and  effects.  It  is  true 
that  Government  dues  will  be  prospectively  col¬ 
lected  in  gold,  and  silver,  and  that  the  paymentsto 
the  army  and  ri^ivy,  and  all  the  public  creditors, 
will  be  made  in  the  same  currency,  es  they  ought  to 
be,  and  must  be,  if  we  are  to  have  a  Government 
of  the  people  and  not  of  the  banks;  but  the  States 
will  be  left  to  regulate  their  own  institutions  in 
their  own  way;  ami  it  should  not  be  forgotten  that 
the  specie  that  the  Government  collects  is  immedi¬ 
ately  distributed  among  the  people,  and  goes  into 
the  general  circulation.  The  effect  of  this 
measure  will  be  to  infuse  into  the  circu¬ 
lating  medium  of  the  country  a  larger  propor¬ 
tion  of  the  precious  metals,  and  to  contribute  in  no 
smalUdegree  the  means  to  secure  the  convertibili¬ 
ty  of  bank  paper  in  the  several  States  by  preventing 
the  exportation  of  specie,  while  the  process  of  col¬ 
lection  and  payment  will  distribute  it  among  the 
people,  where  it  is  less  exposed  to  the  grasp  of  the 
speculators  and  brokers  at  the  moment  of  pecuniary 
distress,  and,  by  the  natural  laws  of  trade,  it  will 
flow  back  to  relieve  the  banks  in  the  hour  of  peril, 
and  enable  them  to  maintain  a  specie  basis.  Ano¬ 
ther,  and  a  very  important  consideration  at  this 
time,  is  the  subject  of  Abolition.  A  sincere  attach¬ 
ment  to  the  union  of  the  States  is  among  the  cardi¬ 
nal  doctrines  in  the  creed  of  Democratic  Republi¬ 
canism,  and  ever  has  baen,  from  the  foundation  of 
the  Government  to  the  present  time.  It  has  already 
appeared  that  the  cry  of  Southern  influence  was  a 
prominent  topic  of  Federal  warfare  in  the  North, 
in  the  days  of  Jefferson  and  Madison,  to  excite  the 
prejudicesof  the  North  against  the  South,  and  the 
seeds  of  political  abolition  may  be  seen  in  the  pro¬ 
ceedings  of  the  Hartford  Convention,  where  they 
propose  an  amendment  to  the  Constitution,  “so  that 
Representatives  and  direct  taxes  shall  be  appor¬ 
tioned  according  to  their  respective  numbers  of 
free  persons,  excluiing  Indians  not  taxed,  and  all 
other  persons.”  The  supporters  of  this  Adminis¬ 
tration  in  the  North,  with  a  few  exceptions,  are 
utterly  opposed  to  all  the  mean  and  incendiary 
schemes  of  political  Abolitionists.  They  are 
determined  to  maintain  inviolate  the  com¬ 

promises  of  the  Constitution,  in  good  faith, 
and  under  all  circumstances.  I  mean  not 
to  say  that  the  Whig  party  are  all  Abolitionists,  but 
most  of  the  Abolitic  nists  are  Whig-;  and  some  of 
their  political  leaders  are  incessant  in  their  efforts 
to  make  political  capital  out  of  the  natural  preju¬ 
dices  of  a  free  people  against  the  institution  of 
slavery,  and  also  out  of  the  past  proceedings  of 
Congress  touching  the  disposition  of  Abolition  pe¬ 
titions.  The  Abolitionists  in  the  district  I  repre¬ 
sent,  almost  to  a  man,  vote  the  Whig  ticket.  If,  at 
the  time  of  my  election,  I  received  one  vote  from 
that  quarter,  it  is  unknowm  to  me.  I  do  not  be¬ 
lieve  that  any  such  case  can  be  found.  Having 
said  thus  much,  I  will  only  add  on  this  point,  that 
many  of  the  Abolitionists  are  honest  and  upright 
men,  aud  sincerely  believe  they  are  engaged  in 


God’s  service,  without  the  remotest  intention  of 
doing  any  thing  to  hazard  the  peace  of  the  coun¬ 
try,  or  the  union  of  the  States.  It  was  my  intern 
tion  to  have  made  a  few  remarks  as  to  the  right  of 
the  people  to  be  informed,  of  the  views  and  princi¬ 
ples  of  candidates  for  elective  offices;  but  this  ground 
has  been  so  ably  and  fully  occupied  by  those  that 
have  preceded  me  in  the  debate,  that  I  despair  of 
being  able  to  offer  any  thing  either  new  or  useful, 
and  therefore  I  will  forbear. 

Now,  Mr.  Chairman,  I  approach  a  more  diffi¬ 
cult  inquiry.  What  are  the  principles  of  the  party 
calling  themselves  Whigs?  If  wc  look  at  the  pre¬ 
sent,  we  have  no  means  to  form  any  conclusion 
whatever;  silence  and  secrecy  reign  throughout 
the  land.  Recent  information  discloses  the 
fact  that  they  have  gone  through  the  parade 
and  form  of  a  national  convention,  and  presented 
candidates  to  the  American  people  for  the  first  two 
offices  within  their  gift,  but  adjourned  without 
“any  general  declaration  of  the  views  of  the  great 
Opposition  party;”  and  we  are  since  told,  with  the 
air  of  authority,  that  “it  was  deemed  impolitic,  at 
the  then  crisis,”  to  make  any  such  exposition — for 
the  rea  on,  undoubtedly,  “that  no  new  issue  be 
made  to  the  public.”  But  the  people  were  not  sa¬ 
tisfied  to  take  these  important  matters  on  trust;  and, 
when  they  found  they  were  seriously  called  upon 
to  discard  rheir  public  servants,  and  give  their 
places  to  others,  the  inquiry,  as  was  natural,  at 
once  arose,  wherein  will  the  country  be  benefited 
by  the  change?  It  seems  the  people  supposed  they  I 
had  a  ri;iht  to  know  what  they  were  to  expect,  if 
they  should  consent  to  the  change.  They  believed 
it  was  a  matter  in  which  they  had  some  interest; 
and,  as  the  convention  had  neglected  to  inform 
them,  they  thought  they  would  apply  to  the  Gene¬ 
ral  himself.  Knowing  that  General  Jackson  was 
an  honest,  frank  man,  and  never  concealed  his  opi¬ 
nions,  they  could  not  doubt  that  General  Harrispn 
would  take  great  pleasure  in  informing  them  upon 
matters  of  such  vital  interest,  to  enable  ihem  to 
determine  what  course  they  would  adopt  at  the  ap¬ 
proaching  election.  But  the  only  answer  yet  re¬ 
ceived  is  the  one  from  his  confidential  committee, 
in  which  they  'say  “that  their  policy  is,  that 
the  General  make  no  further  declaration 
of  hi*  principles  for  the  public  eye,  whilst 
occupying  his  present  position.”  So  that 
the  people  are  still  in  the  dark  upon  the  subject  of 
the  inquiry,  and  likely  to  rcma:n  so,  unless  infor¬ 
mation  can  be  had  from  other  sources  than  Gene¬ 
ral  Harrison  or  his  confidential  committee.  To 
prevent  misrepresentation,  I  will  say,  once  and  for 
all,  that  it  is  no  part  of  my  intention  to  disparage 
General  Harrison,  or  to  speak  disrespectfully  of 
any  man  living,  but  it  has  been  my  object  through¬ 
out  to  deal  with  the  party  opposed  to  this  Admi¬ 
nistration  with  the  freedom  which  the  Constitution 
secures  to  every  Representative  of  the  people.  The 
inquiry  is  still  to  be  answered,  what  are  the  prin¬ 
ciples  of  the  Opposition?  One  of  the  best  defini¬ 
tions  that  I  have  seen,  is  to  be  found  in  a  letter  of 
J.  &.  Adams  to  Dutee  J.  Pierce,  dated  7th  Sep¬ 
tember  1835.  Here  Mr.  C.  read  the  letter,  ol 
which  the  following  are  extracts: 

“lam  yet  convinced  that  the  parly  which  has  been  these 
stwo  years  .struggling to  break  you  down,  the  base  compound  of 


Hartford  Convention  Federalism  and  royal  arch  masonry,  is  so 
rotten  with  the  corruption  of  both  its  elements  that  I  hail  with 
joy  the  victory  which  you  have  achieved  over  it.” 

Again  he  says: 

“  Of  that  party,  treachery  is  so  favorite  an  instrument,  that 
I  have  heard  Mr.  Burgess  complains  that  they  have  used  it  even 
with  him.  It  is  their  nature  and  their  vocation.” 

And  again: 

“  They  have  no  honest  principle  to  keep  them  together;  (heir 
only  cement  is  a  sympathy  of  haired  to  every  man  of  purer 
principles  than  themselves.” 

It  is  proper  to.remafk,  that  Mr.  Adams  does  not 
use  the  term  Whig  party,  but  he  was  speaking  of 
the  party  opposed  to  Mr.  Pierce,  and  every  one 
knows  which  party  that  was.  Now,  it  wouid  net 
be  parliamentary  for  me  to  say  that  any  member  of 
this  committee  was  destitute  of  political  principle, 
but  I  have  a  right  to  say,  that  the  Whig  party,  as 
such,  has  no  principles  of  national  policy,  which 
they  dare  avow.  If  this  be  a  mistake,  why  is  it  not 
corrected?  If  it  is  not  convenient  for  the  hero  to 
speak,  why  do  not  his  friends  speak  for  him?  If 
one  committee  is  not  sufficient,  give  him  more,  but 
let  us  have  an  answer.  The  people  want  light— 
they  demand  it,  and  if  their  reasonable  request  is 
refused,  does  any  one  so  far  undervalue  their  intel¬ 
ligence  as  to  suppose  they  will  be  deceived  as  to 
the  reasons  which  dictate  the  refusal?  It  is  impos¬ 
sible.  What  is  the  course  of  the  Opposition  press 
at  this  time?  Absolutely  filled  with  mere  hurrah,  and 
nothing  but  hurrah.  When  the  inquiry  is  made 
of  them,  Is  your  candidate  in  favor  of  a  national 
bank?  we  are  met  with  the  answer,  Hurrah  for 
Tippecanoe.  Is  he  in  favor  of  a  high  tariff?  a 
similar  answer  is  ready:  hurrah  for  the  “log  cabin 
and  hard  cider;”  and  so  on  throughout  the  cata¬ 
logue.  What  sort  of  an  issue  is  this  to  present  to 
a  free  and  intelligent  people,  capable  of  governing 
themselves,  and  claiming  the  right  to  choose  their 
own  public  agents  to  administer  the  affairs  of  a  Go¬ 
vernment  of  their  own  creation,  and  which  every 
motive  of  interest  and  patriotism  prompts  them  to 
uphold?  Do  not  be  deceived,  gentlemen;  this 
shallow  trickery  will  not  avail  you;  it  cannot  suc¬ 
ceed.  You  must  come  out  from  your  hiding  places, 
and  avow  your  principles,  and  expose  them  to  pub¬ 
lic  scrutiny,  or  you  will  be  overwhelmed  in  the  re¬ 
sult.  The  people  of  this  country  cannot  be  de¬ 
ceived  by  any  such  devices.  Even  in  the  midst  of 
the  torrent  of  abuse  and  complaint  against  this 
Administration,  they  will  turn  round  to  its  revilers, 
and  ask  them — What  do  you  propose,  to  remedy 
the  evils  of  which  you  complain;  and  what  does 
your  candidate  for  the  Presidency  propose;  and 
what  authority  have  you  to  speak  for  him,  after  he 
has  refused  to  speak  for  himself?  Then  gentle¬ 
men  will  find  that  all  this  talk  about  the  poor 
man’s  candidate  will  not  stand  the  test  of  the  scru¬ 
tiny  and  intelligence  of  the  laboring  man  in  the 
Northern  States.  I  am  sure  that  this  class  of  ray 
constituents  would  feel  themselves  insulted  by  any 
such  flummery;  they  have  too  much  good  sense, 
and  understand  Federal  treachery  too  well,  sir, 
to  be  thus  easily  deceived;  and  let  any  party 
that  does  not  believe  it,  make  the  attempt — I  am 
willing  to  witness  the  result.  But  it  is  useless  tio 
pursue  this  matter  further;  for  one,  I  am  satisfied 
what  the  country  must  expect,  if  the  Opposition, 
should  be  successful  in  their  efforts  to  overthrow 


O  A  c! 

this  Administration,  of  which  I  do  not  believe  th^e  tl 
is  the  least  danger;  but  if,  contrary  to  all  reasona¬ 
ble  calculations,  they  succeed,  then  we  must  pre¬ 
pare  ourselves  for  another  reign  of  Federal 
misrule.  A  National  Bank  will  be  chartered,  the 
tariff  will  be  restored  and  increased,  unconstitu¬ 
tional  appropriations  will  follow,  and  the  proceeds 
of  the  sales  of  the  public  lands  will  be  divided 
among  the  States,  and  the  State  debts  will  be  as¬ 
sumed,  and,  lo  complete  the  catalogue  of  mischief 


thjft  will  ensue,  the  North  and  the  South  will  be 
arrayed  against  each  ether-  upon  the  subject  of  Abo¬ 
lition,  the  effect  of  which  I  will  not  undertake  to 
predict,  but  the  future  will  show.  Now  if,  in  alt 
this,  as  a  humble  member  of  the  Democratic  party, 
1  am  mistaken,  is  it  not  true  that  thousands  of  the 
people  of  this  country  honestly  believe  that  it  is  all 
likely  to  take  place;  and  if  there  is  any  mistake 
about  it,  why  does  not  the  Whig  candidate  speak 
out  and  remove  the  impression1? 


3  0112  061614373 


